Your Beef Is With Choice

People aren't anything. They represent things. A person isn't bubbly, for example. They represent ideas that others interpret as a bubbly personality. You choose ideas and express them. While you express those ideas, you represent them.

Everyone on this planet is acting as the representative of ideas. You could think of every person as presenting to you the offer of the ideas that they represent. That's what they're doing as you interact with them. They're presenting you with the ideas that they've chosen to represent. You have the ability to agree with those ideas, disagree with those ideas, oppose those ideas, or remain neutral to those ideas. How you choose to react will define your experience with those people.

To see people clearly, you have to see what ideas they're choosing to represent. This is a mastery skill. Most people go into automatic reactions around others. They don't look at the ideas that the other person is representing and, therefore, they don't make choices, deliberately and advantageously, given the facts.

For example, you might find yourself in a heated argument with your uncle at a holiday gathering. That's an automatic reaction. Because you know your uncle, you know the ideas that he represents before you talk to him. The tone of the conversation can be predicted before either of you speak. If you take a moment to evaluate what ideas your uncle is choosing to represent as he approaches you from across the room, you can offer yourself the option of not interacting with him or choosing to discuss topics that aren't polarized. That would be the action of clarity and the exercise of power.

Most people, however, will engage in the argument and think, "My uncle is a jerk." He's not a jerk. He's chosen to embody and explore certain ideas. You've chosen to embody and explore ideas that are different from the ideas that he's chosen to represent. The conflict of those ideas is obvious before either of you opens your mouth. So, why are you engaging him in conversation?

You engage him in conversation because you want to convince him to represent the ideas that you've chosen to represent. This does not make you a saint. You're attempting to deny his free will. You're being arrogant by presuming that you know more than him and better than him (even if you have what you perceive to be great justification because your ideas are more humane). You're wanting your will to dominate his. You're intentionally choosing to battle his choices. No matter how well intentioned, you're behaving like a tyrant.

"But my ideas are kind, and his ideas are cruel," you say.

This dimension allows anyone to explore any idea that exists here. You don't get to control what other people choose to explore. You get to control what you choose to explore. When you get involved in other people's choices, you're in dangerous territory because you don't have the ability to make decisions for other people.

"But I can try to persuade them to change their minds and make it difficult for them to make cruel choices," you reply.

It's true that you can do those things, but then your focus is on those ideas. Those are ideas of control. Your desire to control takes your attention off of the ideas that you prefer to represent (those supposed humane ideas), and you become a representative of the idea of controlling others. What's more, it places your attention on those ideas that you're trying to eliminate through your control, thereby fueling the ideas that you don't like. It's counterproductive.

It's more effective to place all of your attention on the ideas that you want to represent, giving those ideas life, stamina, and power. You insure the reality of those ideas that way, instead of guaranteeing their demise as you withdraw energy from the ideas that you prefer and give that energy to ideas that you don't prefer, all because you can't live with the fact that others have free will.

Others have free will. You're never going to be able to control free will. Even if you destroy someone off of the face of the Earth, they were just a representative of an idea. The idea still exists, and anyone can become the new representative of that idea. Your beef isn't with the person, representing the idea that you don't like. Your beef is with the fact that the ideas that you don't like exist, and people are free to choose to express those ideas.

Your anger is never with another person. It's with the fact that you live in a dimension that allows people to make choices that you don't like. Until you make peace with that fact, you're never going to have peace with people. You have to find a way to feel secure in a reality of unlimited choice. That's the genuine challenge. All else is a distraction.

You find that security by learning to place all of your attention on your desires. You stop doing battle with ideas and the representatives of those ideas. You stop doing battle with choice. You stop doing battle with freedom. You stop doing battle with the dimension. Because you're going to lose that battle. The dimension wins every time. However, the dimension will support your desires. All you have to do is get on board with that support by keeping your attention on the solutions instead of the problems. The solutions are always your desires (i.e. those experiences that are appreciative in nature). Focus there. If you need permission, consider it granted.

You're reading by Samantha Standish. If you want to learn more about what happened in my out-of-body experience, my book, "Equal," is available for a nominal amount at,

Popular posts from this blog

Buckle Up, Dorothy, Standardization Is Going Bye, Bye

Skill Games 1: Feeling The Emphasis

Skill Games 2: Codebreaking