Would you stop a rapist or just let him do his thing?

[Epikur]

47 minutes ago, wwhy said:

Any other rapist want to be blocked? Speak up now...

You are on the wrong forum

[SpiritualAwakening]

It's the identity that attaches (and therefore agrees) to this movement of thought (which it also attaches to) and therefore puts the energy forth into motion and acts on this desire due to the memory of past experiences, (which it also attaches to), by being raped him/herself, acting on the memory of a past act of rape or due to lack of sexual pleasure. It's the content of your consciousness (identity). So you tell me.

EDIT: A question arose
Is there any kind of action which is totally free from all conditioning? Conditioning is to have an ideal which is then dictated or tries to impose on what IS. So what is the right kind of movement which will not change according to circumstances? Is it possible to act without a motive, an idea, without any form of conditioning. That would be an action which is not born out of past knowledge, an action which is not partial, not limited, an action which is not time-bound because that would bring about it's own contradictions

Only a mind which is totally free from ALL conditioning can ACT outside of the mind and would need NO thought movement to act.

Edited April 12, 2021 by SpiritualAwakening

[BipolarGrowth]

I would do my best to stop the rapist, but this is not a selfless or good action really. Selfishness runs just as deep of a motivating factor as selflessness here if not even more so for anyone inquiring deep enough honestly. I think it would take some mostly unheard of levels of consciousness, or simply sociopathic tendencies, to be able to allow rape to take place without guilt. Relative good = that which serves the collective ego of society. If I were in total and infinite God Consciousness, I think it’d be closer to 50/50. 

[Hello from Russia]

It depends on how you want to experience your life intimately

[Inliytened1]

10 hours ago, BipolarGrowth said:

I would do my best to stop the rapist, but this is not a selfless or good action really. Selfishness runs just as deep of a motivating factor as selflessness here if not even more so for anyone inquiring deep enough honestly. I think it would take some mostly unheard of levels of consciousness, or simply sociopathic tendencies, to be able to allow rape to take place without guilt. Relative good = that which serves the collective ego of society. If I were in total and infinite God Consciousness, I think it’d be closer to 50/50. 

...And if you were in God Consciousness there would be no "world"..so In the "world" there is relative evil (devilry) and relative good...both ultimately collapse into the Absolute.  But in the "world", if devilry ran rampant ultimately there could be no "world"..and the "world" is how God expresses Itself.  After much suffering t would collapse into Love and start all over again.   You could say that keeping the world free of devilry is selfish and you would be right Absolutely speaking.  But that isn't applicable here....if doing this is reducing the suffering of another, it comes from a place of selflessness and not ego and thus a higher state of being.

[seeking_brilliance]

I would help the victim find a good therapist. 

[SpiritualAwakening]

8 hours ago, m0hsen said:

So see this all as play of God and free yourself from any morality, shoulds and should nots,  but think with your heart, so I'd definitely listen to my heart's call to  intervene and I'd do so if i could, and see this as God's love, will.

Within this illusion we have been given free will in order to learn. With this free will we are able to create and live any kind of life we would desire, this free will leads up to choice and these choices result into experiences. What choices you make from the perception of your self created illusion are still bound to the realm of relativity. God is objective, NOT relative.

Edited April 12, 2021 by SpiritualAwakening

[Danioover9000]

@BipolarGrowth

33 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

I would do my best to stop the rapist, but this is not a selfless or good action really. Selfishness runs just as deep of a motivating factor as selflessness here if not even more so for anyone inquiring deep enough honestly. I think it would take some mostly unheard of levels of consciousness, or simply sociopathic tendencies, to be able to allow rape to take place without guilt. Relative good = that which serves the collective ego of society. If I were in total and infinite God Consciousness, I think it’d be closer to 50/50. 

   You could also include the act of saving the victim as a selfish act as well. Instead of the motive being that you are god or out of compassion, instead the more seflish motive is because you have been training in the gym, or martial arts, and saving is justification for all the training you did finally, the struggles were worth it. Or to be seen as a heroic person, like in a movie, and get back than manly feeling you lost. Or to hook up with the hot chick, because, well, you payed the guy earlier to attack the woman, to create that situation in the first place for her to see you in an empowering light, a very dependable partner in the future. And so on.

[BipolarGrowth]

@Inliytened1 I mean I was typing out that in full God Consciousness the chance of stopping the rape might be close to 0% also because you wouldn’t even be able to move possibly, but I also thought that at this point you could non-physically stop the rape. I left this out to avoid making it more convoluted than it needs to be lol. Wanting to preserve goodness in any form at higher states of consciousness is the residual individual superego co-opting God for its own selfish purposes. There really is no higher or lower action imo, but you can’t possibly truly grasp this at a visceral level without experiencing what we typically call higher consciousness. As the ego is reduced and purified, the superego replaces it under the guise that it is the essence of God, but ultimately superego activities are just sneakier and more desirable. It’s easy to become attached to them while feeling as if you have reached the final goal. Imo, the final goal is far beyond any expression of relative goodness or order in any consistent pattern. It is a true reflection of Totality in all of its forms somehow represented in what at first appears to be finite. This conclusion is mostly the result of contemplation rather than direct experience though. My direct experience has God Consciousness aligning with relative good in most cases, but it also has moved past this at times. 

Edited April 12, 2021 by BipolarGrowth

[Carl-Richard]

Just a reminder that if you use "the absolute" as an excuse to be an asshole, you fundamentally misunderstand what it is.

[Inliytened1]

@BipolarGrowth nicely said but I don't 100% agree with the statement that a finite self cannot preserve goodness up to the human limit without it being super ego.  I mean yes you will never be 100% selfless without accepting ABSOLUTELY everything...but then again the doing so would be, in the end, humanities undoing. (imo) ..humans are humans afterall.. I think when you have a society of all awakened beings I think it could flourish because all actions would be coming through the direct manifestation of the Godhead while still taking care to preserve survival.   It is indeed, a delicate balance.  Just my take.   This is very advanced stuff 

[traveler]

12 hours ago, Holygrail said:

Morality is relative, so in the absolute sense, it's all just goodness spawned out of God's love to explore all of his infinite creations. So would you let God's desire to experience rape play out or intervene to stop it? 

It is impossible to see this from a dreamt pov, but all of that is a story. Can't blame you, many "teachers" teach this bullshit. There isn't a separate you from God that could make a choice. The whole story about God's desire and goodness, is "God" appearing as that story. Anyone that claims they can describe or know God, is God dreaming separation. The dream is that a person can know God, then other people look at that person to tell them about God, missing that that whole "play," is God, it is this. Rape is rape, stopping rape is stopping rape, calling the police is calling the police. The complications, doubt and value is something added on top of the simplicity of what is already. 

[Holygrail]

Stopping the rapist would be a selfish act as you're rejecting a part of yourself and identifying with only a part of the whole rather than the whole of which you are. But the rapist is even more selfishly not considering the emotional trauma he's inflicting on her for his own partial egoic gratification, causing her to become more fragmented and fearful (since she will not be accept that she is also that rapist). So overall, even though you're still being partial and selfish, stopping the rapist would be a less selfish desire overall since you don't want her to become more fragmented, and letting her grow in life more easily towards wholeness without the mental distortion impeding that. The rapist would also learn about the backfiring and limitation of his actions by getting the shit beat out of it and going to prison, therefore growing as well. Also selfishness for selflessness, going full circle, the paradoxical singularity of reality

Edited April 12, 2021 by Holygrail

[Raptorsin7]

7 hours ago, wwhy said:

No, only a man-child with no self control wants to be free of should and should nots.

Go ahead and rape someone then. And enjoy your freedom in prison not dropping the soap.

“Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right-doing there is a field. I'll meet you there. When the soul lies down in that grass the world is too full to talk about.” Rumi.

Is a Rumi a man-child haha?

Edited April 12, 2021 by Raptorsin7

[Carl-Richard]

18 minutes ago, Holygrail said:

Stopping the rapist would be a selfish act as you're rejecting a part of yourself and identifying with only a part of the whole rather than the whole of which you are.

If that is true, then not stopping the rapist would also be a selfish act as you're rejecting a part of yourself and identifying with only a part of the whole rather than the whole of which you are. It's a mute point. Absolute selflessness/selfishness is not relevant to moral questions. All morality is anyway selfish.

Edited April 12, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Holygrail]

9 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

If that is true, then not stopping the rapist would also be a selfish act as you're rejecting a part of yourself and identifying with only a part of the whole rather than the whole of which you are.

that also makes sense, not stopping him also be identifying with a part rather than the whole. Every action is necessary, though we can selfishly strive towards the most whole (selflessness), paradoxically

Edited April 12, 2021 by Holygrail

[freejoy]

3 hours ago, seeking_brilliance said:

I would help the victim find a good therapist. 

Would you help the rapist find a good therapist?

 

7 hours ago, wwhy said:

Another "enlightened being" trying to justify and rationalize the rape of another

Maybe this Taoist story will illustrate it better?

 

There was once a farmer in ancient China who owned a horse. “You are so lucky!” his neighbours told him, “to have a horse to pull the cart for you.” “Maybe,” the farmer replied.

One day he didn’t latch the gate properly and the horse ran off. “Oh no! What a disaster!” his neighbours cried. “Such terrible misfortune!” “Maybe,” the farmer replied.

A few days later the horse returned, bringing with it six wild horses. “How fantastic! You are so lucky,” his neighbours told him. “Now you are rich!” “Maybe,” the farmer replied.

The following week the farmer’s son was breaking-in one of the wild horses when it kicked out and broke his leg. “Oh no!” the neighbours cried, “such bad luck, all over again!” “Maybe,” the farmer replied.

The next day soldiers came and took away all the young men to fight in the war. The farmer’s son was left behind. “You are so lucky!” his neighbours cried. “Maybe,” the farmer replied.

[SoonHei]

13 hours ago, Tim R said:

From the absolute perspective, there's no reason why you should intervene. But equally, there's no reason why you should not intervene. 

beautiful and total

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, Holygrail said:

that also makes sense, not stopping him also be identifying with a part rather than the whole. Every action is necessary

I mean just think about it: if "the whole" as you call it consists of somebody performing an action (rape), then how does somebody else performing an action (you stopping rape) somehow contradict with the whole? Again, invoking "the whole" as a way to deal with moral questions ("a part") is not really useful. The whole is the whole regardless.

[Holygrail]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

I mean just think about it: if "the whole" as you call it consists of somebody performing an action (rape), then how does somebody else performing an action (you stopping rape) somehow contradict with the whole? Again, invoking "the whole" as a way to deal with moral questions ("a part") is not really useful. The whole is the whole regardless.

Tim R: From the absolute perspective, there's no reason why you should intervene. But equally, there's no reason why you should not intervene. 

He honestly put it perfectly

Edited April 12, 2021 by Holygrail