Hello Thomas and all,
I would like to comment on this rich thread a little more if I may. Thomas I
agee with you when you say that "The unconscious survival structures of the
'Orders of Love' need to be seen through so that one is open to newer
information." All unconscious survival structures belong to ego or mind itself
and do provide context that enables the processes of transformation. The mental
interplay between guilt and innocence (in conscience) is a map or pathway to
primary development and evolution of a fully formed ego. As far as
responsibility is concerned.....when developing a strong ego the path is one of
"I am responsible" or "I am." Much of our new age markets are filled with this.
That kind of taking responsability is necessary to separate from the other,
belonging itself, and crystalize ones individuality/aloneness. In the
developing of individual strength this type of responsability is entirely
necessary.
There is however a time that comes when ego is developed and mind is ripe to be
transcended. A natural consequence of this fullness is the development of
willpower. At a certain point the willpower begins to understand that it is not
only "I" but "thy will be done." Here personal power begins to encounter divine
power. The individual now has the strength to surrender the ego or mind. At
this point it is no longer about taking responsability in the old way. It is
about letting go, dissolving into something greater. This offers a greater
response-ability to allow life to live you. Now the old rules engaged via the
first responability do not work in this new cycle of growth. The rules have
changed.
These life cycles and seasons are always about kill or be killed, life and
death. This is not up-levelling nor avoiding responsability. This is in tune
with what is, as it is.
Kind regards
Sadhana
From: Thomas Bryson <tb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Re: Culpability of Soldiers
Frank, Lutz and others,
This is a wonderfully rich thread. I am in alignment with Frank and Lutz on
this.
Some things being sparked in me:
1. As for the situation with the soldier in Vietnam who sparked this thread,
his sense of guilt may be completely appropriate. His guilt needs context.
2. There isn't any new information coming to the greater system through
killing. The unconscious survival structures of the 'Orders of Love' need to be
seen through so that one is open to newer information.
3. The therapeutic approach that I return to over and over is to ask of those
who are dead, 'What do they need now?'
4. Seeing the play of killer and killed as divine play is to spiritually
up-level the conversation and avoid responsibility for one's actions.
Thomas
On Aug 27, 2011, at 12:01 PM, F Breuer wrote:
I would like to agree with Lutz, that killing during war is murder, in
terms of the inner consequences, e.g. guild and in regards to
responsibility.
The context of killing, i.e. civil life, personal interest, or war, may
frame the incident differently and may alter the felt responsibility of
one or another individual. However, at the end of the day, no one can
escape responsibilities and responsibilities for own actions cannot be
delegated to "circumstances".
We know that blaming circumstances only works in the short run.
Bert Hellinger was known for provocative statements, I love him for
those, but it does not necessarily result in me buying them.
Frank
Frank Breuer, MAPS
Clinical Psychologist
On 26/08/11 10:09 AM, Lutz Pamberger wrote:
Hi Chris and Anne
Is from your point of view killing in war murder when the soldier
decides on his free will to join the army. It is murder from my point of
view.
Lutz
--
Lutz Pamberger (MAPS)
Counselling Psychologist
PO Box L28
Little Grove WA 6330
Australia
+61(0)417 952 899
www.pamberger.com.au
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
