Wisdom for helping others

Beings learn at their own pace from their own level.

# They may even go the wrong direction until they realize rock-bottom or the dead end or the circular nature of their condition.

# Even if insight is given to them, depending on their level of awakeness they may even ignore it completely or forget it almost immediately.

# There has to be enough ego/self/responsibility/vision in them to even understand/consider the significance/relevance of the insight communicated to them.

# And if there is more than sufficient ego/self/responsibility/vision, then they would willingly be receptive/investigating/investing in suggestions for growth and vision improvements.

# Greater their vision/level of development, more would be their receptivity to even the smallest suggestions/cues, and they would take it upon themselves to advance/progress.

So it is important to keep these things in mind before helping someone.
Without this wisdom, the helper’s energy gets significantly wasted.

Knowledge, Free will, Intention, Humility

Real knowledge and Free will are connected.
Real knowledge allows your free will to serve you and the higher field.
Else if your free will is not in alignment with the higher field, to that degree you face opposition/resistance/pain.

Intention is a heart emanation.
Vision/Light is from the heart.
Desire is seeing, greater the desire = greater the seeing.
Knowledge is for the execution of the intention = for power/efficiency/innovation.

Humility is to realize your limitations and condition.
Humility is relative to your recognition of what true power is, and how little of that you actually possess.
Humility is from the recognition of your own ignorance.
Humility is the precursor to an exploration and a consequent knowledge upgrade.

Love and Positive Vision are the same thing

To really see something is to see the “source inspiration and beauty” behind that which is seen.
It is to see its place in a larger context, in a larger framework of meaning.
Otherwise, it is only surface/superficial seeing.
Seeing/Vision is a lot more about context than the content of the sensory-appearance of what is seen.
The following concepts are closely related to each other = the concept of seeing/vision, value, and beauty.
When you see something from love, you see the creation as the creator would see it.
There is no upper ceiling to perceiving source inspiration/love/positive vision/value/beauty.
The deeper your positive seeing, the more your capacity for the above qualities.

Please refer to my earlier blog post to learn about what I mean by positive vs. negative vision:

The connection between IDENTIFICATION and LOVE:
This is an extremely deep topic, but I’ll try to give a few pointer examples.
* For example, say, you look at your personal laptop that has all your life’s work = personal photos, videos, files, documents, music, playlists etc.
All that gamut of context is tied into your seeing of the laptop.
So seeing = both context and content.
Its not possible to quantify, but to give an idea, the content is just 1% or less while 99% or more is context.
The sensory impression is only a pointer to the tree of knowledge that resides in the mind.

Let’s say, you have a dog, and that dog too sees your laptop.
How would he see it? The 99% of context, memories, attachment, associations, information you connect with the laptop would not be present for the dog.
So he would see it as just “content” mostly.
* It is like looking at a stranger’s smartphone of an unknown make/model (so very little associative connections as such).
Imagine how different would that be from seeing your own smartphone.
* Imagine the difference between looking at your children vs. looking at a random person’s children.

When an artist creates a work from source inspiration, he is seeing from positive vision.
He sees the value/worth/significance/importance/beauty of his work, because it came forth from his channeling of source inspiration itself.
If he puts it up in an exhibition, and if various art critics come and start critiquing it, then the critics are seeing from negative vision here.
They are not seeing it the way the artist sees his own work which is from positive vision.
Both positive and negative vision are kinds of vision.
The distinction is that, positive vision connects what is seen to the source of creation (which is the potential/love/inspiration), while negative vision does not do that.
Negative vision does not see what the art piece is, rather it sees what it is not by comparing it to something else that is loved.
That is the fundamental difference.
Positive vision is to see from the point of view of the creator.

The concept of negative vision

There was a story I heard Sadhguru narrate, and that played a great role in helping me reach this insight.
The story goes like this:
There was once a man who was a painter.
He acquired some disease from which his vision started slowly deteriorating.
His friend asked him, “What will you do if your vision gets too bad to paint anymore?”
The painter answered, “I will continue to paint until I can see.
If my eye sight gets too bad, then hmm, I will become an art critic.”

This story is hilarious and has a lot of irony.
But it also contains profound wisdom in it.

Positive vision = Presence of presence
Negative vision = Presence of absence
Then the question would be: How can there be ‘presence of absence’ at all?
The answer to that would be: Right! Absence cannot exist.
Presence of absence is the absence of the presence of something else.
That is ‘negative vision’.

The algorithm is:
It is like if I present a variable X, to you.
You see it as “not A”, “not B”, “not C”, and so on.

Like if I show you a laptop:
With negative vision, you would see it as, not a desktop, not a tablet, not a TV, and so on.
But that would preclude you from seeing the laptop as it really is.
Another example would be, if I show you a pink bottle, the positive vision person would really experience the pink bottle as pink (as it is).
But the negative vision person would look at it and say, this is not blue, not red, not green, and so on.

Positive vision is to see how “‘this’ is ‘this'”.
Negative vision is to see how “‘this’ is ‘not that'”.
The ‘that’ here is a holding on to an ideal or structure from memory like a ghost image in your perception and then using that to not only obscure what really is, but it also actively resists what is.
Negative vision is a disease, because it is dis-ease, you resist what actually is, with what you are holding on to from your memory which imposes itself like a ghost image in your perception and creates the resistance.
You hold on to this memory ghost, impose it and obscure ‘what actually is’, and also actively resist ‘what actually is’ in the process.

This concept that I explained above, has DEEP PROFOUND implications in illuminating this in-articulatable disease we carry in our lives.
My own life is replete with zillions of examples, where I have seen things with negative vision.
How many times, have you perceived/experienced/seen your surroundings/yourself /others with negative vision?