The importance of Cruelty

[dawn90]

I was thinking that apart from being able to defend yourself, cruelty and sadism might paradoxically be signs that an individual is, or at least was, in extreme attunement to the most intimate parts of the human condition and that's why he can be an effective sadist, because he understands. I remember a quote from somebody saying that only someone who understands people on a deeply profound level could possibly be a sadist. And isn't understanding people the same as understanding life? Wouldn't that make sadism a symptom of enlightenment? In our upside down world there are upside down people, who do upside down things, in an upside down manner, to at the end get back at this upside down society. And isn't enlightenment, in the same way, an upside down manifestation of what society wants?

 

 

Edited November 19, 2017 by dawn90

[Marblehead]

Very sensitive topic, this one.

 

For now, just a comment to the video:

 

Many years ago I was required to read a Leonard Cohen poem and present my understanding of what he was saying.

 

My conclusion is basically the same as the instructor in the video's proposal, especially regarding the Germans.

 

My instructor said I was wrong.  How could I be wrong?  It was my understanding.

 

But we do need to know what cruelty is so that we can do our best to oppose it.

 

[liminal_luke]

Great video.

 

Please note that the professor did not say that being cruel or sadistic is a sign of self-knowledge or enlightenment.  He said that being aware of that aspect of one`s shadow -- of one`s capacity for cruelty -- was an entry point into wisdom.  People should be aware of their capacity for cruelty and sadism and then not be cruel.  The part about not acting on that potential for cruelty is all-important.  People who are actually cruel and sadistic are neither self-aware nor enlightened.  Quite the contrary.

Edited November 19, 2017 by liminal_luke

[dawn90]

21 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

People who are actually cruel and sadistic are neither self-aware nor enlightened.  Quite the contrary.

 

Then how are they able to enjoy their cruelty? How do they know HOW to be cruel and sadistic if they don't know anything and are not aware of anything? You get what I'm saying? It seems to me that the messenger has confused the message and with their understanding they could've been highly evolved spiritual beings if not for a tragic turn of events. LIke the professor says: it's an entry point into wisdom. There are things in common between enlightened beings and highly sadistic individuals, it seems to me. Of course, I'm not saying that it's a good idea to be cruel, or that cruel people are enlightened. However, for people who don't know anything they seem to know quite a whole lot. 

 

Almost all sadistic people I have ever met have had a strange mix of being on the one hand extremely knowledgeable regarding life; and on the other extremely stupid and unwise. Like a predator who knows what makes people tick but can't use that knowledge to actually transcend his own way of being, very strange.

[Marblehead]

You know, we are actually discussion three different concepts here.

 

1.  Knowing what cruelty is.

 

2. Being a cruel person.

 

3.  Being a sadistic person.

 

Number 1. is the only one that can be considered an aspect of enlightenment.

 

 

 

 

 

[cold]

This and the thread on compassion go hand in hand imho.

 

5 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

You know, we are actually discussion three different concepts here.

 

1.  Knowing what cruelty is.

 

2. Being a cruel person.

 

3.  Being a sadistic person.

 

Number 1. is the only one that can be considered an aspect of enlightenment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Knowing what cruelty is, is a beginning of awareness. A first step towards enlightenment, imho. Knowing oneself is a start.

 

12 minutes ago, dawn90 said:

 

Then how are they able to enjoy their cruelty? How do they know HOW to be cruel and sadistic if they don't know anything and are not aware of anything? You get what I'm saying? It seems to me that the messenger has confused the message and with their understanding they could've been highly evolved spiritual beings if not for a tragic turn of events. LIke the professor says: it's an entry point into wisdom. There are things in common between enlightened beings and highly sadistic individuals, it seems to me. Of course, I'm not saying that it's a good idea to be cruel, or that cruel people are enlightened. However, for people who don't know anything they seem to know quite a whole lot. 

 

Almost all sadistic people I have ever met have had a strange mix of being on the one hand extremely knowledgeable regarding life; and on the other extremely stupid and unwise. Like a predator who knows what makes people tick but can't use that knowledge to actually transcend his own way of being, very strange.

 

I don't think they are enjoying their cruelty, just as one acting out of compassion isn't enjoying it.

Its who they are the results of genetics and culture exposure.

Its arguable that the sadist and compassionate being are both being true to their being.

[liminal_luke]

22 minutes ago, dawn90 said:

 

Then how are they able to enjoy their cruelty? How do they know HOW to be cruel and sadistic if they don't know anything and are not aware of anything? You get what I'm saying? 

 

Sociopaths can be good con artists, but that`s no great shakes.  Lack of empathy, poor impulse control, narcissism --  these aren`t signposts of awareness in my book.  

[Nungali]

Yes, a few crossed wires in the OP that somehow extend from what is in the vid.

 

But I don't see ' cruelty ' as associated with enlightenment ; it is an imbalance  -  extended from  'severity' ;  the wise (or enlightened)  may need to invoke 'balanced severity' , but cruelty is an excess.

 

"   Remember that unbalanced force is evil; that unbalanced severity is but cruelty and oppression; but that also unbalanced mercy is but weakness which would allow and abet Evil. "

 

You do not have to be cruel or a sadist to address 'evil'  ,  that actually helps create it .    Its an attitude thing  (like enlightenment) . If someone is violently wielding a machete , it might be necessary to break their arm ,  but not to delight in the act and  continue to twist and wiggle the now  disarmed person's  broken arm .

 

Although I imagine the psychopathic  cruel sadist imagines they are very enlightened about human nature  - not really, they have just observed a weakness in human nature and  taking advantage of it to satisfy their 'crossed wires' .

[thelerner]

On 11/19/2017 at 1:56 PM, dawn90 said:

I remember a quote from somebody saying that only someone who understands people on a deeply profound level could possibly be a sadist. And isn't understanding people the same as understanding life? Wouldn't that make sadism a symptom of enlightenment?

 

There's a good chance a sadist made that quote, thus it might not be from a reliable, non-partial source.   From my limited experience sadists are simply assholes. addon> my definition being someone who enjoys the pain of others>

 

Cruelty is an interesting subject though.  Rather then deep understanding its more likely a closing of the heart.   It might look like enlightenment to some, but imo it's really more a separation from all.  Closed heart- empathy, sympathy are gone, wholeness impossible- self and ego rules and cruelty builds them up.  To me its more the opposite of enlightenment though there is undoubtedly self serving power there.  Until it self-destructs. 

 

Not a good path, but cruelty is inside all of us.  I think we keep in check, not with our minds, but by keeping in-touch with our hearts. 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by thelerner

[rex]

In Kabbalistic terms cruelty is imbalance being a misexpression of the forces of Gevurah.

[Lost in Translation]

19 hours ago, dawn90 said:

There are things in common between enlightened beings and highly sadistic individuals, it seems to me.

 

In a sense both could be said to be free. In this specific sense both are free from fear, specifically fear of consequences of their actions. To use Star Wars parlance, this is the path to the Dark Side.

[dawn90]

I understand that cruelty is not enlightenment. But lets think out of the box for a minute, and consider. Instead of seeing the sadist or the cruel individual as sub-human or underneath anything that begins to resemble anything spiritual, it might help to see them in another light. The exercise is to see in what they ARE enlightened. Most of you will disagree with me, saying that they are as far from it as can be. But I beg to difer. My intuition tells me there is something here, something we might not understand.  

 

For me, the "dark side" in the movie star wars is only the dark side because those who use it can't quite handle the elevated intensity that comes with it. In my opinion the light side users are only better at self-control because they deliberately choose to avoid the emtions that would challenge theirself- control. Negative emotions have one thing in common: they are intense. And intensity is needed in order to transend.

 

 

If you are a big enough container, you won't experiment "negative" emotions as negative, only as intensity. They only start to feel "negative" once you cannot contain them . Cruel and sadistic people are just eternally spilling over. They are small people (Small containers) with too much inside. They look to dominate but are paradoxically themselves dominated by their own intensity. Could it be that sadistic people possess the intensity required for enlightenment but only lack the space to channel it? Instead of rising like a serprent, if your energy just bursts out in all directions it might not result in enlightenment but in something else entirely. 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2017 by dawn90

[Lost in Translation]

34 minutes ago, dawn90 said:

If you are a big enough container, you won't experiment "negative" emotions as negative, only as intensity. They only start to feel "negative" once you cannot contain them . Cruel and sadistic people are just eternally spilling over.

 

Good...

 

34 minutes ago, dawn90 said:

They are small people (Small containers) with too much inside. They look to dominate but are paradoxically themselves dominated by their own intensity.

 

Excellent!

 

34 minutes ago, dawn90 said:

Could it be that sadistic people possess the intensity required for enlightenment but only lack the space to channel it?

 

Does enlightenment require intensity? I posit intensity is one path, not the only path. But intense feelings do tend to bump us out of ourselves, for better or for worse.

 

I do think you are on to something. It's not orthodox, but that's fine. Sith users know The Force well, for what it's worth.

[Aetherous]

Sociopaths are the opposite of enlightened. Their enlightened nature is buried extremely deep beneath layers of tangled nonsense, much more so than normal people. If you think you see wisdom in such a person, it's a perverted form of wisdom.

[liminal_luke]

Everybody has to work with what they have.  Any emotional tendency or situation can be a doorway into awareness if a person is willing to shine awareness there.  Shadow work can be potent, and many people have a lot of hidden treasures hidden in the basements of their psches.  So yes, becoming aware of our potential for cruelty and sadism is a very good thing.

 

There`s danger in a thread like this, however.  We can end up glorifying cruelty, putting sadists on some sort of pedestal.  Sadists aren`t in any way closer to enlightenment than the rest of us.  Just no.  Sometimes when a person`s been cruel it`s tempting for them to try and find a hidden upside, as if to say "yes, I was cruel but it`s just because I`m someone who has this great spiritual potential." This is making excuses and dodging responsibility.  It`s hogwash plain and simple and not spiritual in the least.   

 

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by liminal_luke

[thelerner]

Often discussing action, the concrete is better then philosophizing.  

Dawn90, what are people doing that makes them sadists?  What typical actions? 

thanks.

Edited November 21, 2017 by thelerner

[dawn90]

I'm so sorry if I made it sound like I was defending or glorifying sadistic or cruel behavior. Of course I'm not doing that. But, like in everything, extremes do look alike, and sometimes not only look alike but are very alike in not so un-meaningful ways. 

And this fact of life might bother some. Let me ask you: aren't the alt right similar in more ways than one to the alt left? Haven't many extreme leftists gone to the extreme right and vice-versa? I study psychology. So my objective is always to understand and uncover. You have to condemn bad behavior, always, without hesitation. But condemning alone doesn't change the fact that this society and the way it thinks and discriminates helps create those very same behaviors we supposedly try to discourage in people. Sadists aren't closer to enlightenment, but in a way they just might be. If sadists are the low-lives of this society, and enlightened people the best of this society, then both finish the circle of life. If there's a begining and an end, doesn't it mean that the enlightened and the sadist are within touching distance? Matter and anti-matter; light and darkness; right and left; life, death; extreme spiritual devopment, and low spiritual development. To fall into a deep hole you must be standing on  something big. If you're in a deep hole and you get out, you become an expert rock climber. You still have to climb. It's so close, yet so far at the same time right?. But the possibility is presented to you: get out of the hole and you become a god. If you're just in a normal place the idea of reaching new plateaus would never  even  occur to you. The sadist, on the other hand, knows he's in a hole. He wants to get out of the hole. He knows that if he gets out of the hole he is god. But he doesn0t know how to climb. He never gets out. So close yet so far. That's what I mean. He sees things but he cannot change his condition regardless, which puts him in the furthest position from enlightenment because he is in a hole; but at the same time the fact that he's able to see he's in a hole makes him more aware than all those people who believe where they are is how things are. So close, yet so far at the same time. The sadist sees Russia from Alaska but has to walk in the opposite direction because the water is too cold. And the fact that he's bottom of the barrel becomes painfully clear to him. 

 

I want to share the following quote with you guys: 

 

Quote

This is a great lesson for us all to learn, that in all matters the two extremes are alike. The extreme positive and the extreme negative are always similar. When the vibrations of light are too slow, we do not see them, nor do we see them when they are too rapid. So with sound; when very low in pitch, we do not hear it; when very high, we do not hear it either.

 

I feel this strongly. However it's not my intention to hurt or offend anyone. 

 

Take care everyone

[thelerner]

No problem, its an interesting subject.  I agree (and so does Daoism) that extremes even or especially opposite ones, can be very like each other.  I'd disagree with Enlightened being the top of society.   Imo they're most likely outliers, easily misunderstood, and as likely scorned as admired.  Sadists.. sadly can be at the top of society- absolute power corrupts absolutely or at the bottom. 

 

The thread got me thinking of Satanism.  Depending who you ask, to some it's all about individualism, nothing to do with cruelty or devil worship.  To others that's the whole point. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bud Jetsun]

People choosing to think of cruel/careless actions to do and then chosing to complete them causes cruelty. Requires no special skills or insights to do, provided the recipient is willing to receive whatever action as cruelty.  If one gives the Zen master a flower he/she may smile, if one thrusts a sword into their guts, he/she may smile. 

 

Shedding delusion and instead embracing the whole of the real is enlightenment. 

 

Enlightened beings have no restrictions on retaining the capability to behave how they choose as every other being also retains. 

 

Enlightened beings may recognize every being who isn't recognizing complete mindfulness and compassionate choice in thought as masochistic already beyond the ability of outside effects to be meaningful. Enlightened beings may recognize every being not recognizing complete mindfulness in actions as sadistic, intentionally or unintentionally. 

Beings choosing not to appreciate the real are also optionally capable of recognizing and/or imagining whatever they choose. 

 

Unlimited Love, 

-Bud

Edited November 22, 2017 by Bud Jetsun

[dawn90]

30 minutes ago, thelerner said:

I'd disagree with Enlightened being the top of society. 

 

I meant spiritualy. It's what we're supposed to aim at as a society. 

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, dawn90 said:

 Sadists aren't closer to enlightenment, but in a way they just might be. 

 

Some years ago I interned in a county jail.  Not all the inmates were sadists of course, but as a group they did skew towards the sociopathic.  Anyway, they didn`t strike me as being anything close to enlightened.  I get what you`re saying Dawn90 about opposites coming together; it`s an intriguing idea but it just doesn`t jive with my experience in the field. 

 

No worries about offending me though.  It`s an interesting topic and we`re all free to discuss -- and believe -- whatever we want. 

[Cueball]

A huge amount of energy can be bound up in denial of the negative, the unkind, the violent and maintaining the illusion that those forces are under control.

 

But that may go out the window at some point, because the control is not some external faculty to switch on or off according to one's own moral precepts: it literally makes up the one that is undergoing dissolution. Otherwise the path becomes a partial approach, and increasingly lopsided. Jung said, "One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious."

 

Amongst all the goodies that are unwrapped, opening Pandora's Box is possible and even necessary.

 

Irina Tweedie’s training in the Sufi tradition — the path of the heart, the path of love — led to a point where she beat a mouse to death.

 

Her teacher came back with something like “Yes, that sort of thing can happen.”

Edited November 22, 2017 by Cueball

[Lost in Translation]

On 11/21/2017 at 3:49 PM, dawn90 said:

Sadists aren't closer to enlightenment, but in a way they just might be. If sadists are the low-lives of this society, and enlightened people the best of this society, then both finish the circle of life. If there's a begining and an end, doesn't it mean that the enlightened and the sadist are within touching distance?

 

The element of choice is key. Sadists take from others. Compassionate beings give to others. In both cases there is an exchange, but only in the latter is it voluntary.

 

On 11/21/2017 at 4:14 PM, Bud Jetsun said:

Enlightened beings have no restrictions on retaining the capability to behave how they choose as every other being also retains

 

Ah ha! So what happens when an enlightened being inflicts gratuitous pain on others, or does that not happen? Is all pain serving a greater good and the enlightened one knows this, or is there simply no pain?

[TheCLounge]

You can't have kindness without cruelty.

 

You can't have cruelty without kindness.

 

They both go hand In hand

 

An enlightened person (imo) doesn't seek to be anything.

 

What is considered good or bad Is a personal experience.

 

So I wouldn't call cruelty a form of enlightenment. But I wouldn't call kindness enlightenment either..

 

The only true path that leads to enlightenment is a path of awareness and acknowledgement (imo)

Edited November 27, 2017 by TheCLounge

[dawn90]

 

On 22/11/2017 at 11:29 PM, Apeiron&Peiron said:

As long as you try to "integrate" the shadow, it will be like trying to "integrate" cancerous tumors. In a sense, it is always integrated because, as long as it exists, it is a part of the body. But, it only comes into existence when when different things have gone haywire. The shadow shouldn't be integrated; it should be burned to ash in the fires of alchemical transmutation and used to fertilize the energy-deprived ground of a person's natural state of being. And from that, natural goodness will grow (provided a person doesn't warp the flow of energy).

 

What you say gives me the strong impression that you're referring to the solar plexus chakra's power to transform, especially when you mention "fires of alchemical transmutation." Maybe the word integrate shouldn't be the word, although I kinda like it. Transform, perhaps, would be a better word. I think the goal shouldn't be to become evil, of course not. But to be able to use the energy of evil for a greater good, yes I think that's what we want. I see it this way: the shadow as  unrefined black petrol and the solar plexus as the best petrol refinery out there. 

 

I found this quote that you might like:

 

Quote

Deeper work, like shadow work, which usually involves the root, sacral and solar plexus chakras requires more specific work. Talk therapy combined with energy therapies like reiki, acupuncture and yoga can help shift blockages in the root chakra or manage addictive behaviors residing in the sacral chakra. As we release stuck energy caused by stress, anxiety, fear and doubt in these lower chakras we can draw lighter stronger energy to our core, our solar plexus.

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by dawn90