Using "Not" in an affirmation

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Your misunderstandings are not my concern. This topic is about "Using Not in an affirmation" or should rather be called "Turning an Affirmation into a Negation."

I misunderstood nothing. You were clearly referring to the Physical Exercise thread (https://ancient-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10747) when you wrote that people might "turn this into an argument" and accuse you of "bullying people". As this was the mantra you kept repeating in that thread as well after I called you out on being an asshole no reason and blame-shifting, which I proved beyond any doubt. The only difference is this time no one even challenged your opinion in any way. Yet you preemptively played a victim out of fear of being challenged. And then you try to distract by correcting the topic title which is completely irrelevant, lol. You clearly have some deep rooted delusional issues that you need to work on.

Not that it's my job in any way to point this out, I'm only responding because you obviously invoked me by repeating here what you accused me of doing (word-for-word) in the other thread. Passive aggressiveness isn't. And I won't take it.

Would you just STOP dragging this out any further?

If someone decides he does not want to talk about it or similar things any further then why are you insisting to do so?

I already explained my reason for replying. Now you're basically bumping the thread with muh feelz instead of looking at the substance of what was written. You may want to be more selective in who you choose to channel.

 

[HauptSturm]

Yeah, I've been realising about self-imposed, and self-affirmed, limits. "I am very rich." <-- How much is very?

We must realize the ultimate money affirmation so that we can all become sloth trillionaires. *rubs sloth hands*

 

[Taol]

....

...

I already explained my reason for replying. Now you're basically bumping the thread with muh feelz instead of looking at the substance of what was written. You may want to be more selective in who you choose to channel.

Perhaps you should ponder about weather or not you're doing so yourself.

For the note, that is all Im going to say. I am not going to post anything else off topic to this topic.

 

[Taol]

I have no experience in using "not" in an affirmation. But.. if I ever have a negative thought, it is followed up with a denial reply, followed up with a positive affirmation or thought.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

...

I already explained my reason for replying. Now you're basically bumping the thread with muh feelz instead of looking at the substance of what was written. You may want to be more selective in who you choose to channel.

Perhaps you should ponder about weather or not you're doing so yourself.

Nice comeback.

Look people, I like to keep topics on track as well. But when someone blatantly tries to shit all over you because they were proved wrong- and is too much of an incongruent coward to respond themselves - this justifies a response. Which is what I gave. If anyone has a problem with this, youare welcome to make your argument here or in private. But don't post angry messages in 1000px red font or curse words if you don't have anything of value to add with them. It makes you look like... Crybabies.

 

[JoS Forum Contributions]

Guys just chill out and have a conversation.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Guys just chill out and have a conversation.

 

[Taol]

Guys just chill out and have a conversation.

Thanks for being an awesome mod HP

(by the way you may want to disapprove this message too because some people might take it the wrong way. Sometimes such things just wont seem to stop or something.. but I just wanted to say thanks)

 

[FancyMancy]

Guys just chill out and have a conversation.

Reading my reply, you know I'm calm. As I said, it's an opportunity for people, both those here who always cry and others who might be the same, to realise that this is not the time nor the place to cry like that, but I would still like a reason why my general reply was taken as a direct and personal attack; my thread (in my siggie) wasn't directed towards any individual, and I doubt HPHC666's was, either. They should both be read through a few times.

 

[Stormblood]

Guys just chill out and have a conversation.

Reading my reply, you know I'm calm. As I said, it's an opportunity for people, both those here who always cry and others who might be the same, to realise that this is not the time nor the place to cry like that, but I would still like a reason why my general reply was taken as a direct and personal attack; my thread (in my siggie) wasn't directed towards any individual, and I doubt HPHC666's was, either. They should both be read through a few times.

In my opinion, messages are taken as direct and personal attacks because many people can't read past appearances (the communication style) right to the message (the essence).

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

FancyMancy, I like your Offended thread. But I wasn't at any point offended, I don't get offended easily. But I'll admit I get annoyed when people don't stand by their words. It's like anyone can say anything and claim it "was taken out of context" or "not meant for a specific person" or the like. We're not politicians.

Most people don't see these things, but I see through them in an instant. And I reserve the right to call anyone out on it if it's directed at me. That's not crying, it's a perfectly justifiable correction. I have very high expectations of and standards for people here. I refuse to believe they are set too high, but I'll admit that some people may need time to learn these things.

So if someone makes a mistake, writes and insult or something quirky, stand by your words. If you feel you were wrong, apologize. It's not that hard. One doesn't need to resort to angry nonsensical messages or even attempted cursing if one is proven wrong. This last paragraph here is an important general reply.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Now, to participate in getting the topic back on track, what are people's thoughts on "I'm free of [SOMETHING]", as
Dypet Rod wrote of above?

I would personally consider this a negation. I've used this myself and know for a fact that it works, even though the situation/thing you want to be free of is mentioned. Like when we affirmed that the Nazarene thoughform was dead, etc.

 

[FancyMancy]

...

You know I didn't say "Nick Vabzircnila fuck off with crying". You know I said it to everyone, yet you said, effectively, FancyMancy is an obnoxious little brat, so does that mean you didn't take it out of context? I said it to everyone, yet you, and only you, decided I said it to you, and only you, directly; no-one else did. So why did you, and only you, decide my reply to everyone was not to eveyone but was to you, and only you; and why didn't anyone else think the same? You also said to another member about using big red font, which is against me, so what do you think your problem with me is, when I said that reply to everyone, and not just you, and only you?

You do deserve the right, yes, but more than clearly - and you know this - it wasn't directed to you. It was a reply to everyone. You say about being wrong and admitting it, but you, I suspect, won't admit you are wrong here. Furthermore about you being wrong - I was not angry. I use "swear words" because I use them. For the umpteenth+more time, text doesn't have tonation and body language and inflection, etc. You inferred my reply to everyone was to you, and only you.

Again - why did no-one else decide my reply to everyone was directed to them personally? No-one else decided my reply to everyone was a personal attack against them directly, so why did you? Are you paranoid?

My contribution to this thread, before you said to provide anything helpful, is regarding using "not" in affirmations, and that can be seen clearly.

I'm going to do a Nick Vabzircnila here - you said you like my Offended thread. That's an attack against HPHC666 because you did not say that you like his Offended thread.

If you read my replies on this forum, you know I use emphasis/stress; a way to do that is add colour, larger font, and bold/italic/underline. Do answer my questions above, and do explain how using emphasis formatting = being angry and = being an "obnoxious little brat". I might update my dictionary.

 

[FancyMancy]

Now, to participate in getting the topic back on track, what are people's thoughts on "I'm free of [SOMETHING]", as
Dypet Rod wrote of above?

I would personally consider this a negation. I've used this myself and know for a fact that it works, even though the situation/thing you want to be free of is mentioned. Like when we affirmed that the Nazarene thoughform was dead, etc.

If someone says, e.g., "I am not troubled by X", that's a negation; and again - OK, you're not troubled by it, but either

1. what are you, or
2. what are you troubled by?

Saying you are free is not a negation. "I am free from X" isn't a negative point - in fact it's very positive! "I do not have illness" vs "I am free from [specific illness]" (each thing has to be done individually, so the things are not watered-down, rendering the working a waste); the first - what do you have, then? The second - you're free from, away from it. Plus also with the first point "I do not have illness", because you specified illness, then it is vibrated and it is the point of the affirmation, whether affirmed or negated; it was mentioned, so the words are vibrated and the energies are programmed regarding illness.

So you don't have illness, but you didn't specify. It's messy. "I am free from illness" or specific illness which someone might have, is good, but affirming that they are healthy fully and completely forever is much better.

"I am not poor." What are you regarding poor (because you specified 'poor')? "I am Richy Rich rich." Well, that's a story.
Using another thread on here - "I am not being hassled by police/authorities/court...". What are you, or what are you being hassled by, regarding police/authorities/court... (because you specified 'hassle' and 'police/authorities/court...')?

The point of an affirmation is to make something specific happen, being directed like a laser rather than wavy lights all over the place and undefined, which can also be causing a stop to something, as opposed to not making something happen.

The item or object in the affirmation is what the energies are programmed for/about/around/regarding. It's illness; health; poverty; wealth; legal hassles; freedom/liberty... Then what do you want to do/cause/make become regarding that item/object? "Not" is too open. If you are not ill, then you might be very ill or have 2, 3, or more illnesses, and other things. Being specific - "I am healthy fully and completely forever" focuses on being healthy fully and completely forever. It's the parameters of what you want to do/make happen.

In an affirmation, you shouldn't use a wrench to hammer a nail; it has a specific purpose/use. Energy has to be programmed directly and to the point of what you want.

Of course, don't own the illness/poverty/hassles. Never say "My illness/poverty/hassles". Instead say something like, "Any and all [specific illness/disease...] in my [body part] is extremely weak; my [body part] is strong and healthy fully and completely forever"; "I have 2/3/4 times more money than I want and need to live comfortably. This money is coming to me quickly and efficiently, and is mine to keep and spend as I please"; "I am free from any and all police, authorities, jail" (depending on how far the process has taken you (notice I didn't say "how far you are in the process" - don't own it)) "in every way".

If you decide to work on the cancer, poverty, or jail time late - i.e. if the cancer is in a late stage, you're bankrupt/with a lot of debts, or you're in jail already - then it would be rather a lot more work needed to fix the problem, plus if you're in jail, it might be quite hard to do Satanic workings and meditations there...

It's not just affirmations for these types of things. Doing Aura of Protection, Aura/Chakra/Soul Cleansing, and also making Physical attempts, e.g. trying to find an actual job for money, and eating healthily and doing exercise and yoga for health and well-being (legal hassles are designed to be a sustained pain and worry, raping you, and stealing much energy from you over time, so I don't think much can be done Physically, other than going through it - you could also ask Satan or another God or Goddess for help with legal things) are also helpful and important in making a goal/working successful. The affirmations are vibrations which cause things to manifest in Physicality; you are a Physical being (partly) already, so you must work in accordance with your affirmations Physically.

If you are wanting to be free from illness, poverty, and legal hassles (and whatever else, of course), telling yourself that you are free from them should be made better, by saying (affirming) what you are actually instead, accompanied by Physical actions, with the workings and affirmations.

I had used affirmations about being free from things, but I didn't realise that I should make it better, as I just said here, so I'm glad you mentioned that. Thanks.

As an example, using, "I am free from..." might work at 10% efficiency, for example, whereas the correct direct and to-the-point affirmation, with Sanskrit words and visualisations, should work at say 90 or 100% (depending on our abilities, until we improve ourselves and become more powerful).

I'll be making better affirmations for those things now, so thanks again for pointing that out, because it would have been longer before I realised about improving it.

 

[Voice of Enki [JG]]

I do not think affirming being free of something is the same as negating something by using Not.

Putting not in an affirmation is essentially the same as denying the truth stubbornly. Say someone is currently poor (Just the stick with the theme of the examples given) and wants to change this, just affirming "I am not poor." is like denying the truth in the same way as an alchoholic could say they aren't drinking while literally holding their bottle on their lips.

You are only fooling yourself, not changing anything, however if you'd say "I am now freed from poverty." it's different, since you are not negating the truth, but attempting to change the truth, ie, freeing yourself from an unwanted truth. Though, I also agree that affirming just that is not enough to reprogram yourself when it concerns something very general and subjective like poverty.

For the best results you should combine this with a positive affirmation, or perhaps only a positive affirmation like others have suggested here.

I think key words like Freed and also Banished (I've found this one useful from my personal experience), have a place in certain affirmations when dealing with specific concrete issues, like ridding yourself from something, rather than changing something within yourself.

Ridding yourself from poverty cannot be done unless you make a change from within and re-program yourself to attract wealth, however if you are suffering from a disease for example then doing a working to remove this by affirming you are freed from said disease, or this illness is permanently banished from your being would be effective because this illness is an unnatural addition rather than a fundamental concept that governs your being on a higher level.

Good health is the natural state of the gentile body and soul, so an illness would be an unwanted "addition" that gets in the way of your good health, therefor removing it rather than doing a working to reinforce your health will work better if you are suffering from something specific.

Being poor or wealthy is like a state of being that is determined for a large part by your soul and other outside influences, in order to make this change just ridding yourself from poverty won't really change anything because you aren't becomming anything else, you'd just have nothing at all regarding this, therefor a change needs to be made for this to succeed, thus a positive affirmation like "I am now wealthy/rich." is more effective since you are projecting to your subconscious what you desire and attempting to manifest this desire through the energy you raised during your vibrations.

Make sure you visualize what your affirmation means to you, how you want it to manifest in reality, and how you envision yourself to be when this working is fully manifested. That really helps empower the affirmation since it gives the energy something tangible to reach towards and bring to you.

The more concrete and detailed the better. In case of wealth, feel yourself living your ideal wealthy life, envision yourself being exactly like that, living this existence and know in your mind that this is you and that this is your existence without any doubt.

Actively use your mind to manifest what you desire, if possible using all your senses, like imagining the smell and the touch where it can apply, involve your entire being if possible, this really empowers your workings a lot, and not having any doubt that you live that existence and that what you are visualizing is your reality, even if you don't yet have this, it will help you manifest this is you actively use your willpower like that to change your current reality to the desired one.

Never doubt when doing a working, and don't believe. Just know that it is as you envision.

 

[Dypet Rod]

Well, FancyMancy and VoiceofEnki basically said it all. But that's what I was about to say, that there is a difference between a negation and mentioning something negative/undesirable.

An affirmation is when we state something as being a true fact. A negation is when we try to disclaim a fact by saying it is not a fact or didn't happen, which is weaker.

In this sense, it's okay to mention something negative/undesirable in your affirmation, as long as what you're doing is stating as a fact that this negativity is gone.

I suppose this is because programming the energy to do something is about setting an action in motion, not about undoing an action that has already been done before. Energy doesn't quite understand "undoing" something, is it a force which is sent to do something.

 

[Dypet Rod]

Also, on a side note, to me it is better to affirm "I am free OF" than "I am free FROM".

Because "I am free FROM" means you are breaking free from a condition that you found yourself in before at some point, which can kind of reinforce this undesirable reality in your mind.

Whereas "I am free OF" means that this undesirable thing does not exist in you at all. As in "sugar free", or "free of charge".

See the difference?

I believe "I am free OF" sounds more positive in one's mind. But both ways may work anyway.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

...

You know I didn't say "Nick Vabzircnila fuck off with crying". You know I said it to everyone, yet you said, effectively, FancyMancy is an obnoxious little brat, so does that mean you didn't take it out of context? I said it to everyone, yet you, and only you, decided I said it to you, and only you, directly; no-one else did. So why did you, and only you, decide my reply to everyone was not to eveyone but was to you, and only you; and why didn't anyone else think the same? You also said to another member about using big red font, which is against me, so what do you think your problem with me is, when I said that reply to everyone, and not just you, and only you?

........

If you said it to everyone, I must have been included in that. If you grab a hose and spray water out on a group of people, that doesn't make any single person in that group unwet, to give an off the wall example. And since I was one of the two or three people active in the thread at the time, well... This is common sense. And yes, I really did find that reply obnoxious and I thought you were being a brat. That was some really nasty language, and not at all necessary. About the others, I don't know what they were thinking, but I can't imagine they were impressed. You're usually well mannered.

So the last ditch point you're trying to make honestly seems a bit far fetched.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

If someone says, e.g., "I am not troubled by X", that's a negation; and again - OK, you're not troubled by it, but either

what are you, or
what are you troubled by?

Saying you are free is not a negation. "I am free from X" isn't a negative point - in fact it's very positive! "I do not have illness" vs "I am free from [specific illness]" (each thing has to be done individually, so the things are not watered-down, rendering the working a waste); the first - what do you have, then? The second - you're free from, away from it. Plus also with the first point "I do not have illness", because you specified illness, then it is vibrated and it is the point of the affirmation, whether affirmed or negated; it was mentioned, so the words are vibrated and the energies are programmed regarding illness.

...

I do not think affirming being free of something is the same as negating something by using Not.

Putting not in an affirmation is essentially the same as denying the truth stubbornly. Say someone is currently poor (Just the stick with the theme of the examples given) and wants to change this, just affirming "I am not poor." is like denying the truth in the same way as an alchoholic could say they aren't drinking while literally holding their bottle on their lips.

You are only fooling yourself, not changing anything,

....

Perhaps the point of the "I'm free of [...]" is to deprogram the mind from a specific situation that has been bothersome. I notice that many affirmations on the JOS, for example, contains BOTH this (as the initial affirmation) and the description of the final outcome. So, in other words, you're first letting your mind know that "everything is going to be OK" (which is often necessary for big problems where a lot of negative energy has accumulated) which then opens up the mind to accepting the final outcome, like "All is good". So the negation, or whatever we can decide on calling it, works to soften up the mind before the actual programming.

 

[Shining Sloth 666]

Very thorough and precise information! Thanks a lot to you both for elaborating this much and to everyone else who added useful information about this thread.
Helpfulness is over 9000!.. x)
As for myself I don't have anything to add but my gratefulness^-^ ♥

 

[Taol]

Nick, I had typed an entire reply but then decided on a short one which was dismissed.

Youre just attacking people with your way of communication as if something that doesnt fit your likes has to be attacked taken apart or dictated to fit your requirements.
You have to learn that we are not all duplicates of one another and that by doing this you are causing unnessary fighting and disputes in the SS community.
Some people especially newer dedicated ones may be on a lower level than the ones who have been here longer.

Fine you do have the free speech to talk to people about stuff but you should also be considerate of what exactly you are saying.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Nick, I had typed an entire reply but then decided on a short one which was dismissed.

Youre just attacking people with your way of communication as if something that doesnt fit your likes has to be attacked taken apart or dictated to fit your requirements.
You have to learn that we are not all duplicates of one another and that by doing this you are causing unnessary fighting and disputes in the SS community.
Some people especially newer dedicated ones may be on a lower level than the ones who have been here longer.

Fine you do have the free speech to talk to people about stuff but you should also be considerate of what exactly you are saying.

The difference between myself and basically everyone that has replied to my posts in this thread is that I give arguments for the points I make. While others - including you (even though you weren't involved in the discussion at all) - just complain and attack with completely unsupported claims because I speak an inconvenient truth that triggers them. Namely that they are behaving lowly and in a way that doesn't fit Spiritual Satanists as a whole.

I know we're all individuals, and individualism is VERY important to me. But certain basic standards need to be upheld by each individual of the whole. These include standing by one's words, not lying to each other, communicating if not respectfully, then at least politely as a rule, and generally being forthright with one another. These are not just my standards.

I'm completely aware of what I write, but I'm not going to be 'considerate' for the sake of it. What I've written here is an inconvenient truth for those who are too lazy or cowardly to actually practice these things and would rather lash out with muh feelz or passive aggressiveness (the most cowardly) instead of reasonable arguments. I would encourage you to learn your place before accusing me of stuff.

 

[FancyMancy]

...

In glad what I said makes sense. I thought I might have been going a bit off there.
Yeah, that makes sense. "Of" and "from" tend to be used interchangeably, due to culture; environment; media; education; peer pressure; etc. type of things, but what you said does make more sense. Thanks.

...

It's not just this thread. I made a reply explaining more, but it wasn't approved. It's been in other threads, and also the Yahoo! Groups, and other websites/forums I've been on - that's part of the reason I made my Offence thread, and I expect HPHC666 made his. All the drama (cough) gets beyond the joke after a while. (I didn't try and dramatise it, but it's inevitable!)

Perhaps we'll agree to disagree (I don't think I've used that term before, or not for a long, long time. Look - I'm growing! :lol, and kiss and make-up (but not in public because that would upset my fancy piece AncientShadow666 who likes me fondly, plus it might be embarrassing. )

If someone says, e.g., "I am not troubled by X", that's a negation; and again - OK, you're not troubled by it, but either

what are you, or
what are you troubled by?

Saying you are free is not a negation. "I am free from X" isn't a negative point - in fact it's very positive! "I do not have illness" vs "I am free from [specific illness]" (each thing has to be done individually, so the things are not watered-down, rendering the working a waste); the first - what do you have, then? The second - you're free from, away from it. Plus also with the first point "I do not have illness", because you specified illness, then it is vibrated and it is the point of the affirmation, whether affirmed or negated; it was mentioned, so the words are vibrated and the energies are programmed regarding illness.

...

I do not think affirming being free of something is the same as negating something by using Not.

Putting not in an affirmation is essentially the same as denying the truth stubbornly. Say someone is currently poor (Just the stick with the theme of the examples given) and wants to change this, just affirming "I am not poor." is like denying the truth in the same way as an alchoholic could say they aren't drinking while literally holding their bottle on their lips.

You are only fooling yourself, not changing anything,

....

Perhaps the point of the "I'm free of [...]" is to deprogram the mind from a specific situation that has been bothersome. I notice that many affirmations on the JOS, for example, contains BOTH this (as the initial affirmation) and the description of the final outcome. So, in other words, you're first letting your mind know that "everything is going to be OK" (which is often necessary for big problems where a lot of negative energy has accumulated) which then opens up the mind to accepting the final outcome, like "All is good". So the negation, or whatever we can decide on calling it, works to soften up the mind before the actual programming.

I had a brief thought about using both the negation and positive affirmation in the same affirmation wording, but I forgot what I read so I didn't entertain the thought for long. What you said, about like a preparation for the stronger/direct positive affirmation makes sense, as well. Thanks.

Very thorough and precise information! Thanks a lot to you both for elaborating this much and to everyone else who added useful information about this thread.
Helpfulness is over 9000!.. x)
As for myself I don't have anything to add but my gratefulness^-^ ♥

I'm glad what I said made sense, and it seems to be realised also by others.

Nick, I had typed an entire reply but then decided on a short one which was dismissed.

Youre just attacking people with your way of communication as if something that doesnt fit your likes has to be attacked taken apart or dictated to fit your requirements.
You have to learn that we are not all duplicates of one another and that by doing this you are causing unnessary fighting and disputes in the SS community.
Some people especially newer dedicated ones may be on a lower level than the ones who have been here longer.

Fine you do have the free speech to talk to people about stuff but you should also be considerate of what exactly you are saying.

In case that is to me, then notice all of the fighting and crying that I didn't reply to but saw on this forum and in the Yahoo! Groups. Then notice this one here in this thread which I saw and replied to - and because I replied to the OP thread I also decided to tell people crying and arguing to fuck off - and because I told them this one single time then that means I'm the baddie, but everyone else since the dawn of time arguing and crying are not the baddies because they keep fighting and crying. OK. There must be logic and sense in there somewhere. I also told NaziMan666 to fuck off once for some of the things s/he said which means either s/he is just confused or a very well-trained and careful j00 trying to spread shit. That direct reply to them, yet they didn't respond, yet my reply to everyone was taken directly and personally by one or two. Interesting. As Nick Vabzircnila said, I could have wet numerous people with some water, and the more sensitive ones would be and were upset. That was a good choice of analogy. People arguing and crying are too hot and bothered. I said to fuck off to the group, not to any individuals, to cool the thread and forum down, since I was in the thread. Now I'm the baddie because they want to keep fighting and crying, all hot and bothered, which makes them not the baddies.

As I also said, and I say again - read my and HPHC666's threads; and as I also said, which I say again - take the crying and fighting to email instead of on here. Any further attempt at negation and defence regarding this will tell me that the troll/s is/are too hungry. (Notice only now how I can also be closed-minded - you/them/anyone not listening to me but instead accusing me of a direct attack; me only now, after numerous replies, accusing you/them/whomever of being trolls and ignoring what you say...)

I could have replied to Stormblood, for example, telling him to not start because others definitely would reply...as they did; or go to other threads and name one or more who were involved in that before, but I didn't, either... I didn't reply to anyone directly. Falling on deaf ears (blind eyes) for the umpteen-to-the-Nth-degree-ad-nauseum time - I replied to everyone, rather that blaming any individual/s.

That's it.

As we say and agree - n00bs coming here see this, and wonder if its a big bitch-tits fest, when actually-important things need to be focused on, instead of crying and fighting. If no-one said to stop fighting and crying, it would continue. People don't like to be around shit for very long, and n00bs probably wouldn't be confident enough to tell you to stop crying and fighting. Instead, they'd just leave here and struggle on their own or go to a church or false-Satanism. So...take it to email, and leave the forum/groups clean.

(Depending on my mood, I could decide whether me continuing to reply after others reply again and again might be me 'feeding the trolls', as it were, because I know you/they/whomever will continue replying; thus, proving my point you/they/whomever must have the last word. I wonder who and how many realised that. Therfore, part of my point has been made and proven. Here comes the...well, quite aptly, the negation, which I wait for.)

Take any or all of none of that as a personal attack or don't - but you and whomever, whatever you/they do, make sure you/they enjoy it.

Generally I'm well-mannered, as I've just been told. Thanks. However, though - of course I don't know what people think when they read my replies, but I would have thought many wouldn't think I was well-mannered. I do "swear" a lot and hate and curse the shit way things are and those whom perpetuate it a lot. I said to fuck off to everyone crying and fighting, because there is so much crying and fighting all of the time, and I did not say it to any individual, and then that made me the baddie. Right...

If it were approved, and people were bothered to do so, I'd invite everyone going through our materials and threads to take honest and genuine shots at me, many would agree with me and many would disagree with me. Some may support me and say I'm correct and just, while others would decide they dislike or hate me. It's fine we (you and I, and Nick Vabzircnila and I) disagree about my first reply in big red font (for emphasis, to make it noticed) - but it was not, and it was not, a direct and personal attack. It was to everyone, anyone, whomever to fight and cry elsewhere, instead.

This is going, and going to continue going, around in circles... I know I didn't say it to anyone directly and personally. Think what you (you yourself, and anyone) want to think. As I say - infer what you (you yourself, and anyone) want to infer, believe what you/anyone want to believe, choose to be offended by what you/anyone want to be offended by.

I am very considerate about what I say. When speaking generally, instead of walking on eggshells, I decide to say things and let any individual person choose to be offended or not. I know some people would be upset and offended, but I made that point months ago in my Offences thread. Maybe I'm notorious for being abrasive - yes? No? Honest and direct - yes, definitely, but I can also un-direct...not direct things to individuals personally. I decided (considered) not to name any individual, but reply to everyone. If I went to someone and told them directly and personally all manner of things wrong with them, whether correct or incorrect, that would be a direct and personal attack, and they would be offended most likely, and rightly so. I didn't do that. I told everyone to fuck off crying and fighting, and take it elsewhere, e.g. to email. I've been told to consider things. Maybe people should consider things when other things are said in relation to those things - being offended is a choice, evidently.

Ignorance must be bliss, apparently. The point is to take the crying and fighting off the forum, and I suggested email. Some like to argue just to have a bitch at people, instead of coming to the conclusion that fighting and crying should be done elsewhere, instead of on here. (I might be cynical and say some do come to that conclusion, but ignore it and continue regardless, just to bitch.) I used the words "fuck off". So what? If there was only one or two fights, the individuals being told would be told to go away. If more fights happen, then more word/more strength of words are used, i.e. "fuck off". (My actual truth is, as I keep saying, that's just how I talk, but that is not being accepted, so you/Nick Vabzircnila/whomever accept this false truth if it pleases or appeases you.) As I said - I await further defence and negation, rather than expecting a realisation (agreeing with me) about taking fighting and crying elsewhere.

I'm the baddie for telling no individual, but everyone, to stop fighting, in a thread which I replied to already. Sorry for wanting to keep things nice and clean.

 

[Egon]

Christn't.

Like when we affirmed that the Nazarene thoughform was dead, etc.

 

[Voice of Enki [JG]]

I do not think affirming being free of something is the same as negating something by using Not.

Putting not in an affirmation is essentially the same as denying the truth stubbornly. Say someone is currently poor (Just the stick with the theme of the examples given) and wants to change this, just affirming "I am not poor." is like denying the truth in the same way as an alchoholic could say they aren't drinking while literally holding their bottle on their lips.

You are only fooling yourself, not changing anything,

....

Perhaps the point of the "I'm free of [...]" is to deprogram the mind from a specific situation that has been bothersome. I notice that many affirmations on the JOS, for example, contains BOTH this (as the initial affirmation) and the description of the final outcome. So, in other words, you're first letting your mind know that "everything is going to be OK" (which is often necessary for big problems where a lot of negative energy has accumulated) which then opens up the mind to accepting the final outcome, like "All is good". So the negation, or whatever we can decide on calling it, works to soften up the mind before the actual programming.

That's a good way of putting it I think, first letting your mind know that "everything is going to be okay" and then accepting that "all is good." Nice analogy.

These do seem to work well together, wording is very important, but also knowing how the subconscious reacts to certain phrases and words.

 

[Aconite]

Is it possible to do too many affirmations in one "sitting", so to speak? Say I want to do affirmations for money, health, beauty, love, weight loss, spiritual advancement, possibly more... Is it too much? Does something get lost in the power if you do a lot of them at once?

 

[Dypet Rod]

Is it possible to do too many affirmations in one "sitting", so to speak? Say I want to do affirmations for money, health, beauty, love, weight loss, spiritual advancement, possibly more... Is it too much? Does something get lost in the power if you do a lot of them at once?

Uhm...yes, it's too much.

Like Maxine said in an article: "Never spread your energies thin".
It's more effective to work on one goal at once.

People here may notice that I quote people quite often xD but that's because what has been said by these people is right and should be known by everyone, especially things said by the clergy.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Christn't.

Like when we affirmed that the Nazarene thoughform was dead, etc.

That's excellent!

 

[FancyMancy]

Nick, I had typed an entire reply but then decided on a short one which was dismissed.

In case that is to me

Erm... I didn't see your first paragraph there while I was typing my reply. I just saw your reply begin with "You're just attacking people with your way..." I didn't see your first paragraph, as quoted here. :? I had quoted you, obviously, so did you edit your reply during? It must have included the edit for me.

Is it possible to do too many affirmations in one "sitting", so to speak? Say I want to do affirmations for money, health, beauty, love, weight loss, spiritual advancement, possibly more... Is it too much? Does something get lost in the power if you do a lot of them at once?

Yes. Each thing must be done individuality, and if you do more than one working at the same time, then they must be done with a couple of hours or so between each working each day. e.g. a money working in the morning, then a love working a few hours later in the afternoon or evening; never both in the same working. They would all be weakened and watered-down, rendering you having wasted time and the working be pointless and not achieving anything.

It may also be required to do a working to end something before doing another working to create/cause something, as well, and some workings may need to be repeated for another 40 days.

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

Is it possible to do too many affirmations in one "sitting", so to speak? Say I want to do affirmations for money, health, beauty, love, weight loss, spiritual advancement, possibly more... Is it too much? Does something get lost in the power if you do a lot of them at once?

Yes. Only do one affirmation each time you raise energy (or two or three sentences for the same purpose, as we discussed above). If you do affirmations for several different purposes with the same amount of energy, the energy will not only be spread out too thin (for the majority of people), but the programming part won't work either as the mind will be confused.

 

[Taol]

...

I know we're all individuals, and individualism is VERY important to me. But certain basic standards need to be upheld by each individual of the whole. These include standing by one's words, not lying to each other, communicating if not respectfully, then at least politely as a rule, and generally being forthright with one another. These are not just my standards.

I'm completely aware of what I write, but I'm not going to be 'considerate' for the sake of it. What I've written here is an inconvenient truth for those who are too lazy or cowardly to actually practice these things and would rather lash out with muh feelz or passive aggressiveness (the most cowardly) instead of reasonable arguments. I would encourage you to learn your place before accusing me of stuff.

Your 'not just my standards' are also rules I thought were really important growing up. One of the things I never did was being angry. I never yelled even if people were yelling around me to get their point proven or last word. Not that that matters now.
What I essentially wanted to say is, that certain ethics and things are not able to be removed even if one is brainwashed.

I have also tried arguments that basicly went like 'I say a smartass comment, you say one, and in the end we type an hour long and I can still keep going and going' and it was just tiresome drabble. At that point it doesn't matter who is right or wrong.
Or people that just conclude an argument like total assholes.
I've spend a lot of time watching people communicate, trying to get on top of things.
But there is one difference between the community here and those trolls. And that is, that people will either admit their mistake, come up with a different point, or decide to round it up in a different way.

I will just pretend I didn't read your last sentence. As that is the type of sentence that can ask for a new argument.

Sorry deleted your entire post FancyMancy, it took up too much space in mine.
...

Fancy, I wasn't the one who reported your initial message on the thread. I however did report the one Nick quoted with what he said on it, as he replied with hurtful stuff that could drag out another argument. I knew it wasn't meant at/for me.

As for Nick if you're still reading, you keep saying hurtful stuff to people like 'consider your position' or whatever you said to Fancy, or what you said to me earlier that I should take 'muh feelings' elsewhere, wheras I replied rationally, and never once did I say anything directly to you before that. I did quote you both )Nick + Stormblood) to grab your attention and apparently that for some reason caused a reply.
I think you take things too personal yourself and just do not want to admit it. But I guess that already has been said so never mind.

Well.. In regards to 'feeling offended' about such things. I've heard those whining claims over and over again from a lot of people (take above paragraph as example) so I don't really care about those anymore. To me it just shows incompetence of the people. An attempt to stab someone umpteenth times. I should say umpthousand.
So one question remains then.. Was I too direct?
Yep. Why? What I initially typed out was was less direct and more descriptive, but I just decided to type out the short version.
Other than that, aside from writing, would anyone really let you finish your sentence in an actual conversation? I bet no one there has ever told you anything about how to properly communicate and directly told you that whatever you were saying was making no sense.
My way of talking now is different than how I was growing up, as it had to change required to the environment. People over here.. are not just direct. There were teenagers that had a typical type of saying things and I would know precisely what they would say and where the influence was from. They were soo brainwashed and hurtful. I have been trying very very hard in making myself clear to people that just looked at you and the instant you said a word decided that whatever you were going to say they would just be like ehhh no rolls eyes and just.. I dont fucking know.
Its almost like trying to talk to something between a robot and a broken record.
Rationality is not exactly my way of thinking.
I don't even have a fucking idea why Im including this here but I decided to not delete it for lack of having any better ideas on whatever else to say.


In honesty, have been thinking about weather or not to reply too Fancy, so I want to keep this short.
I think there may have been misunderstandings with Nick, and that is something that may not change for some time. So I want to call a truce. No fighting. No more arguments or proving who is right.

 

[Taol]

Before you reply anything Fancy.. I should have said that those things you mentioned are things Ive already thought a lot about. Thats why I couldnt think of anything else to say.
It doesnt change a thing.
People are sometimes so frightened of standing a mudfigure or being put aside like a donkey.
But, that is all personal opinion. OPINION.

Some agree some disagree and maybe that was my entire point. You can hold up ethics but with acceptance of the self comes also acceptance of what may be wrong rather than trying to be perfect every time. Even to the outside.

Yes it does matter to me how people see me as. But at the same time it doesnt. Keeping up appearances just to dance so one would be accepted.
It has been one of the many conflicts as there are many people not accepting of a different opinion of their own and there is much to be said there.
But. That by no means is a reason to tell people how to behave or what to say and what not to say. These things only cause unnecessary conflict and time off things that REALLY MATTER.

Say what you want. Gossip about me even. You wouldnt be any different than all those other people I have met or seen.

I am not the type of person you may think I am. You may think I havent put a lot of thought or time in it and that I am just replying on a whim. I could care less what you think about that.

I know where I stand now. And what matters to me most is my advancement and betterment of myself. Not what some people who wont even be bothered to read back their own posts and reflect on their own actions would say.

Anyway Im going back to listening Billy Idol. I cannot disagree with Mageson. Hes good even though I wasnt born back then when he got famous and such.

 

[Voice of Enki [JG]]

Is it possible to do too many affirmations in one "sitting", so to speak? Say I want to do affirmations for money, health, beauty, love, weight loss, spiritual advancement, possibly more... Is it too much? Does something get lost in the power if you do a lot of them at once?

When doing workings, always focus on one thing at a time. If you attempt to work on too many things at once your energy will be spread thin and nothing will succeed.

Just go down the list of things you want to change and improve one at a time, make sure to check the dates and astrological timings for optimal times to begin workings for these issues (The official JoS calender can help with that), begin with the most pressing mattters and space out your workings.

If you space them out you can finish full workings for all these issues in a years time quite easily, and begin making significant improvements on all these fronts, just take your time with it and don't try to work on everything at once because that will fail, since it takes a lot out of your soul to work on permanent changes.

You need to focus your attention like a laser on each specific point, one at a time for good permanent results.

 

[Shining Sloth 666]

Completely out of context and solely out of curiosity I was wondering how many of you here who contributed to this thread are air dominant? ^-^ ..as I.

 

[FancyMancy]

I had the same thought - in a voice conversation/argument/debate, people would interrupt and voices would raise...and for some so would fists and the tender, loving care of tables, ladders, and chairs.

As for any other replies - I have read them (which have been approved so far; some might pop-under (before) my reply here), so I am not ignoring them; I saw and read them.

Here's a possibly-funny thought - is it true that drama series, books, and films tend to have higher ratings? (Let that sink in! ) I bet some have become fat eating all of that popcorn!

 

[Nick Vabzircnila]

I did quote you both )Nick + Stormblood) to grab your attention and apparently that for some reason caused a reply.
...

What basically happened here is I told a guy to stop being a jerk to other people, and then I told him again when he tried getting away with it and absolving himself in spite of being proven wrong.

That's not wrong, but then you jumped in and started writing these essay long SIW replies. I could keep addressing every single point of your posts (you're all over the place), but seriously just pull yourself together and move on. FancyMancy even stopped being AntsyPantsy too, he even wants a make up kiss now (flattered but I'd prefer a handshake).

 

[Aconite]

Thank you for all of the helpful responses. I will pick the one that is most important to me and start there.

 

[Taol]

I had the same thought - in a voice conversation/argument/debate, people would interrupt and voices would raise...and for some so would fists and the tender, loving care of tables, ladders, and chairs.

As for any other replies - I have read them (which have been approved so far; some might pop-under (before) my reply here), so I am not ignoring them; I saw and read them.

Here's a possibly-funny thought - is it true that drama series, books, and films tend to have higher ratings? (Let that sink in! ) I bet some have become fat eating all of that popcorn!

Well.. I do notice that the movies that have higher ratings have more action and better fluidity from scene to scene but I really miss the background of what goes on in a person.
And it often happens in books and stories as well. I have an old book here, a story from the 12th century and it literally writes that a person didn't want to make the daughter of a landlord upset whom was riding after her father whom got captured by some bandits.
The girl got upset and felt ill and had to stay in bed for a few days before she was strong and felt well enough to travel further.

And nowadays we are just treating people like.. I don't even know what to call it. Like we are some kind of strangers, aliens, greys ? bees ? I have no idea. Slaves may be a better description though. or the Borg..

As for something further on the other post about talking to people.. Truth is important to me, my own truth and to not deny what has been going on.
As is and happens with many thoughts about the subject which sometimes just end up beating around the bush because of lack of understanding and acceptance.. I accept myself as I am in every way.

Sometimes truth hurts. But you can say truthful things in such a way that people just shut down instantly, or, you tell them in a way that may seem a bit more like beating around the bush.. but if you say things politely.. they may not instantly feel like totally rejecting what you say.
So only in that case would it be necessary to think about how you phrase things.

One thing that I think some are too narrowminded in is either that you have to be ready at any moment with any reply, that is a perfect thing or something. Or that people sometimes just have things that are indescribeable.
I have the problem that sometimes I want to say or mean something, and that I know and feel where to go, but I just simply can not think of any words that would mean what I say.
I just literally draw a blank and go in void mode for a second haha.
And there is nothing wrong with that.
There will always be things that can sometimes only be described through art. And sometimes not at all.

Completely out of context and solely out of curiosity I was wondering how many of you here who contributed to this thread are air dominant? ^-^ ..as I.

If you can call me contributing.. no I am definetily not an airhead..

I do have something Im wondering about though. Has anyone ever used an affirmation starting like 'I am freeing myself of ..' ? There is an affirmation I want to use that starts like this.

 

[FancyMancy]

Completely out of context and solely out of curiosity I was wondering how many of you here who contributed to this thread are air dominant? ^-^ ..as I.

I did quote you both )Nick + Stormblood) to grab your attention and apparently that for some reason caused a reply.
...

What basically happened here is I told a guy to stop being a jerk to other people, and then I told him again when he tried getting away with it and absolving himself in spite of being proven wrong.

That's not wrong, but then you jumped in and started writing these essay long SIW replies. I could keep addressing every single point of your posts (you're all over the place), but seriously just pull yourself together and move on. FancyMancy even stopped being AntsyPantsy too, he even wants a make up kiss now (flattered but I'd prefer a handshake).

On the Internet you can be a dog.

AntsyPantsy

Not subtle enough.

 

[Taol]

Completely out of context and solely out of curiosity I was wondering how many of you here who contributed to this thread are air dominant? ^-^ ..as I.

Well, air used to be my second-strongest element, looking at my chart. Now I've been working on balancing for a while.

Not even going to talk about air here but I have to say that you've said things better than I could and those points were of the many thoughts I had on it (except for calling it fake ego - I was thinking maybe too much .. something that HP HC said recently that had to do with overconfidence).

To be honest I was already wondering if I had to just be a total bitch about it and how I was going to do that then. ... and thats not the first time, thats already the second time wondering about it.

Anyway I won't say anything more on this for now, will see how this proceeds.