Self Defense and 'Peace Commands'

[steff74]

NoPR Part One: Chapter 8: Session 634, January 22, 1973.

You could counter such an attack in several ways that do not involve killing. You would not be in such a hypothetical situation to begin with unless violent thoughts of your own, faced or unfaced, had attracted it to you. But once it is a fact, and according to the circumstances, many methods could be used. Because you consider aggression synonymous with violence, you may not understand that aggressive — forceful, active, mental or spoken — commands for peace could save your life in such a case; yet they could.

What does Seth mean with 'commands for peace'? If there would be a situation where someone try to hurt or even kill me, I doubt that any 'peace command' could stop the attacker. How can words save my life in such a situation when things already escalated? I never was in that situation myself, but unfortunately we all know psychopaths from the daily news that even don't need a specific reason for knocking or stabbing someone down. 

[inavalan]

NoPR Part One: Chapter 8: Session 634, January 22, 1973.

You could counter such an attack in several ways that do not involve killing. You would not be in such a hypothetical situation to begin with unless violent thoughts of your own, faced or unfaced, had attracted it to you. But once it is a fact, and according to the circumstances, many methods could be used. Because you consider aggression synonymous with violence, you may not understand that aggressive — forceful, active, mental or spoken — commands for peace could save your life in such a case; yet they could.

What does Seth mean with 'commands for peace'? If there would be a situation where someone try to hurt or even kill me, I doubt that any 'peace command' could stop the attacker. How can words save my life in such a situation when things already escalated? I never was in that situation myself, but unfortunately we all know psychopaths from the daily news that even don't need a specific reason for knocking or stabbing someone down.

From that quote, to me the most important take away is "not be in such a hypothetical situation to begin with".

This is because I should strive to create the reality as I want, and not to have to patch a mistaken reality. If I ever get in a situation in which I have to choose to kill or not, it means that I made many mistaken choices to get there. Nothing that I experience in the physical-reality isn't a reflection of my beliefs, thoughts, feelings, and expectations.

Your inner-senses are not limited by the physical-time, so at subconscious level you can see what's probable to happen, and can freely make choices. It is also true that we are here because not being evolved enough, and being conditioned by this society, we don't consciously use our inner-senses. A way around it, at our level, is to directly ask our subconscious to make choices that are constructive, safe, beneficial for us. This might not be optimum, but it is effective.

If ever you get in a limit situation, still you have the choice to strongly wish a constructive, safe, beneficial outcome, and to banish all negative emotions and feelings, like fear, anger, hate, ... So the consequence of whatever acts you end up with, will not further negatively impact you.

If you accept that "you always create your own reality" (no consensus, randomnicity, or any other external factor), then you'll see what you experience in a different light. This is what I trust, try to do, and often do.

I think the context of the quote you posted gives a better understanding, but it doesn't change it significantly.

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

I think that these quotes I reviewed a few days ago are also relevant to this discussion:

From Session 610 for June 7, 1972:

• "You always know what you are doing, even when you do not realize it. Your eye knows it sees, though it cannot see itself except through the use of reflection. In the same way the world as you see it is a reflection of what you are, a reflection not in glass but in three-dimensional reality. You project your thoughts, feelings, and expectations outward, then you perceive them as the outside reality. When it seems to you that others are observing you, you are observing yourself from the standpoint of your own projections."

And from Session 613 for September 11, 1972:

• "Interactions with others do occur, of course, yet there are none that you do not accept or draw to you by your thoughts, attitudes, or emotions. This applies in each area of life. In your terms, it applies both before life and after it. In the most miraculous fashion you are given the gift of creating your experience."

[steff74]

So there are no 'accidental victims' according to Seth? To experience violence in my reality I need to attract it first with my beliefs. Strong imaginations of violence, always watching the daily news about violence, maybe even learning martial arts just because of the ability to defend myself (instead of train because of sporting reasons) could attract violence - if I can't dissociate from the possibility that someone can hurt or kill me? Is this correct?

I've never experienced physical violence in my life so far (maybe because I'm not the type of person you can quarrel with. I can just turn around and go away in such situations). 

But I thought about the experience of defending a third person if need be. Most of the people around me don't share the same beliefs with me. On the other hand ...

[...] Your beliefs in the safe universe are spreading. [...] In the unsafe universe, however, you—not you alone—believe that something good will be fought over. [...]

(TPS3 Deleted Session October 20, 1975)

When I believe in a safe universe, the people around me are safer too? 

[inavalan]

Maybe the best way to reply is to say this: you (as outer-self, outer-ego) can't blame, nor thank to, anybody else for what you (as outer-self, outer-ego) experience, neither bad, nor good. Also, you can't affect another's experience if he/her doesn't accept it at some level, and creates it as his/her reality.

I tried to formulate a reply several times, and deleted it, because any answer needs additional explaining of my understanding of the nature of reality, and that can become quite long.

[Read]

When I believe in a safe universe, the people around me are safer too? 
[/quote]

This is my guess: If your universe is safe (because you believe it), the people around you would be safe. But it isn't that you've provided safety to others. Others have joined you in the creation of that safe place — portions of others. A portion of you has created a safe universe; the rest of you resides in various, more or less contrasting universes. "Probable selves" is a hard concept to grasp, I think.