action vs inaction (change must come from within)
Self,
There is a persistent bias towards action. It is considered a lessor choice to be inactive. It is even considered a sin to be inactive (the sin of omission). That it is a lie if you leave out information.
Points to consider. If we come here to earth to learn. If the place is a school of sorts. Then there are likely plans setup to assist lessons to come into play. Even if there are no plans, there are opportunities to learn. Plan or no plans when I act I am assuming I know what the other person needs to learn and experience.
If I act, I do this without access to the full body of knowledge of this person what they know and do not know. That seems like poor leadership. Extremely poor leadership. Is that not the blind leading the blind?
To believe I know the full body of knowledge here in 3D. Seems like a big hubris. I assume people have lives beyond this incarnation I know nothing about. Past lives full of experiences that have shapes who they are.
People assume the knowledge they have is enough to justify their acting. I think that is wrong. Even our justice system is based on letting two opposing sides to research and present information for consideration before action takes place.
The idea of not having the bigger picture of knowledge, not having enough knowledge risks 1) not acting thus not making a difference, 2) being frozen in inaction again not making a difference.
While the idea of having enough knowledge to act risks 1) trying to teach lesson the other os not ready for, 2) acting against the lessons others need to learn or are ready to learn.
From the here and now of 3D we have no access to the full knowledge from the beyond 3D. So maybe assuming we have enough knowledge to act is a reasonable conclusion. Because we have to work with whst we have.
But that is not the only valid way to see it.
Esoteric cymatics would see us as grains of sand all organized into a pattern determined by the vibrational frequency of our place in the universe. Each grain of sand is vibrated to the right location for it. And any grain of sand moved by any means will be moved back. Thus action becomes meaningless, has no effect, is of no consequence.
In this system the only way to permanently change the location of any grain of sand is to change the grain of sand itself. The grain of sand must be changed from with in. The grain of sand must change itself.
When that happens the universe will vibrate it to a new location.
Attempt to change others by outsiders do not usually make any changes within. It is the grain of sand itself that must make the decision to change and then change.
This view re-enforces that if you want change you must first change yourself. This is why moving to another state only temporarily changes ones circumstances. Because the universe will vibrate you back into a situation you had before.
Without change from within the single lonely person attracts the same potential partners they were attracting before.
The person MUST do something that changes their inner vibration. Heal, change beliefs, remove trauma, have a NDE, have a life changing event/experience.
Outside attempts to impose change go wrong so many ways. This is the lesson so many have not learned. One is that by imposing change you take on the karmic consequences of that change. You become at least partly responsible for the further actions that person does.
Because you do not control how the other person interprets what happens action is more dangerous than it looks. Yes, you can control what happens but not how that person reacts. you can create a car accident. Depending on that persons mindset they will, 1) say it was god’s will, and seek for why it happened 2) blame themselves, reducing their self worth, 3)blame the other person, reducing their own responsibility, 4) see it as chance, and learn nothing from the event.
If the person reacts by blaming others they may seek to impose stronger drivers licensing laws. This may reduce the number of Uber drivers. Now when a crises happens and there are fewer volunteers to get people to safety. By creating the accident you become partly karmically responsible for all of this downline trauma. You must balance this trauma energy to make progress in the spiritual realm.
Yes, you have enough control to create an event but you do not have enough control to create the reaction. Good intention are not enough to avoid karmic consequences.
Beyond the question of action and inaction. I must question a system that poses only 2 solution options. That’s not right. There are other options, there are other solutions. Maybe not in the reality of 3D. How do I escape the duality of action/inaction?
First by treating it as a continuum. Action can be direct or indirect, the indirect solutions multiple the options to infinity. Inaction on the 3D physical level still leaves many energetic options available on the level of the “energetic field”. Just not ones I’m train for, yet.
I am biased towards inaction for several reasons. The main one being I have felt my anger and know my ability to act on it without thinking. I fear me with a gun. Not because I might kill someone but because doing so would break me. I don’t mean a simple minute of craziness. I mean breakdown I might not recover from in this lifetime.
The second reason is I would undo several lifetimes of work to reach certain spiritual perspectives. A piece of my soul would be lost. Not forever but it would take many lifetimes to get it back. No I’m not talking about karmic consequences, I’m talking about positive spiritual strength. Sure, their are other less violent actions I could take and would take. But this exposes my bias toward my choice for inaction. It is simple self preservation.