Hello All!

Anyone interested in moral counselling? ;)

I have a situation going on and would like to get some feedback from a neutral perspective. So all comments are appreciated! :)

The situation:

About two years ago I moved into a flat with two room mates who were/are close friends of mine. Because of personal differences and my personal needs for solitude and peace and quiet I moved out about three months ago. Now the roommate with the lease-contract is giving up the flat, too - and so he has to refurbish it. I left my room neat and tidy, freshly painted the walls and got a new room mate to take my place. So, basically all I legally need to do.

Now comes the tricky part. The room mate with the lease of this flat has been acting like a total jerk the last 1,5 years. There were way too many incidents to list them all - but basically he was really uncaring, playing the king of the flat, always trying to aggressively discuss with people around and not getting his stuff together.

I now heard what he was doing the last months in the flat: he moved out one month before the other room mates got new flats and left them with a "naked" flat: no laundry machine, no kitchen, no stove, no fridge etc. - without announcing that he would move out at that point. Besides that he left all his trash piled up everywhere in the apartment.

So, now he is asking me to help him with the refurbishing of the flat. His argument is that since I lived there for two years it would be my responsibility to take care of it. There are some damages to the walls in different rooms which he is responsible for and the room mate that lived there before I moved in. I didn't break or damage anything in that apartment.

This guy does not care for his responsibilites with this flat nor has he done before - but he claims all the rights - and now, as I said, he wants me to help him with this mess.

I have a really strong aversion of doing that - because basically I feel he is just trying to use me to lower his responsibility and work. Legally I am fine. He still owes me my bail bond and I have done everything I need to do in that flat. Now: If he were somebody else, someone who would not be acting like him, I would definitely offer my help - simply because I know how much work this sort of thing means. But with the history of all of that I am not willing to.

And today I wrote him and told him just that.

The most simple reason why I find this morally correct is that there would be no learning or evolving involved for him if I just cover his a** again. (Which is what a lot of the people around him usually do. Which is why he never falls the way he would do under normal circumstances.) At first sight one could say it would be uncaring to not help him, but I would find it at least as uncaring toward me, to force me into this thing. And in my reasoning I am helping him and thus care - by letting him see the consequences of his behavior. If you act like the last person on earth, you can't expect anybody to help you.

So, what do you think? Is this morally justified? Or am I fooling myself? ;)

Thanks!

_________________
"Beyond the gate of experience flows the Way,
Which is ever greater and more subtle than the world."

- Dao de jing, 1.

You don't owe someone a constant enabling of their bad conduct. If you have no obligation for the condition of the flat (having done your own cleaning and refurbishing when you left), and he owes you money, will you get that money if you help or will you just be stiffed for it anyway? I'm not sure what you mean by bail bond, as an actual bail bond you paid on his behalf to bail him out of jail or a deposit on the flat for damages. Unless it is a lot of money, it might be worth letting it go rather than be stuck with his responsibilities as you likely won't get it if you don't help. If it was based on a deposit on the flat, he is unlikely to every pay you based upon what you describe as to his behavior and attitude, since you did not insist upon it when you left and fixed up your share of the apartment. That is the kind of behavior to expect from what you describe. From what you say, he is likely to stick you with an ever increasing share if you submit to his request and find yourself doing most, if not all, of the cleaning and repairs plus buying the materials. The request is not reasonable as you describe it. But you have to make the decision relative to the money you refer to based on how much it is and how likely you are to get it under various circumstances. This is the only way it makes sense unless you wish to 'take him on to raise'.

Ted

i can relate to your dilemma as i agonize over simple things like this all the time. it sounds to me like you are looking at the situation the right way. all i can add is something tom said that might help tip the scales: "you cannot help other people, you can only provide them with opportunities to help themselves." beware, though, people don't always react kindly to that method. anticipate that then make a choice. either way you will probably learn something that will help you in the next situation.

Yes. That was my line of thinking...

What you wrote pretty much covers the situation. The money he owes me is a legal obligation here in Germany: If you move into a flat you pay a certain amount of money in relation to the rent - for possible damages etc. And you have to get it back 6 months after you moved out. So, according to our contract, he owes it to me, and I can sue him and bring this to court if he does not pay me back. My position in this issue is very safe. He is the one disregarding his responsibilities.

I usually don't fancy doing such a thing - but in this case my good will and tolerance is worn up.

Pondini,

Yesterday I went into my local library and found an interesting book that might also help you with these issues:

When I say No I feel guilty - Manuel J. Smith

I haven't read it yet. But judging from the author's background and the reviews it got - it promises to be quite practical.

_________________
"Beyond the gate of experience flows the Way,
Which is ever greater and more subtle than the world."

- Dao de jing, 1.

nemo, thanks for the link, it sounds useful. however, the next book i am to read is Dr. Joe Dispenza's Evolve your brain.

EDIT; nevermind. dispenza is a ramtha follower. no thanks.

I listened to the talk by Joe Dispenza, linked above, and don't see anything that is contradictory to anything that Tom says. You should keep in mind that it is all based upon PMR medical science which is in the process of figuring out what it can from access to our virtual brains. You should also keep in mind that as Tom says, our mind as our digital IUOC leads and the brain follows. And PMR medical science does have the advantage that it can access our PMR virtual brain and make some deductions from those observations, both physically and psychologically, while we have no way to actually get at our IUOC as a digital mind.

His talk did make me think that I should try to perhaps clarify something that I have been saying. There may have been the general feeling, certainly some specific feelings, that I over emphasized the length of time it takes in multiple lifetimes to achieve change at the being level by the interaction and pay attention to the feedback loop. While this is true, and most feedback encountered is negative, as you noted perhaps in Dr. Dispenza's talk when he pointed out that attitude's and thinking tends to be 90% negative, there is an asymmetry to our typical thinking process. I gave an example of negative types of feedback and also of positive types of feedback but could have gone into more detail that I did not think to do at the time. I was trying to keep to a decent length of response as a reminder of things said before, not an extended treatise. So I add now that if you treat someone shabbily, you get back some rapid negative feedback. That can react with our negative attitudes turning into rejection of the feedback, based upon defenses from our ego, and thus little effective gain.

If you can start to break down some of that negative background attitude and defense from ego, I should point out that you can increase positive effects as follows. If you start really and deliberately trying to 'do better' in interactions and express more love, you can start to get much more positive feedback in relation to the amount of negative feedback. This positive feedback does not tend to raise the defenses of ego and combine negatively with the underlying negatives of attitudes. It instead starts to make attitudes less negative and more towards predominantly positive. The more 'holding of a loved one' or simply giving a helping hand to a friend and resulting feeling of how much we value their free will achievements in a selfless manner, the more positive feedback to interact with our positive attitude so we will get more 'mileage' out of that unit of positive feedback than out of a unit of negative feedback mixed with ego reaction.

So I would not want any of you to be discouraged from having a more positive attitude and deliberately trying to improve your interactions. I wouldn't bet the farm on it getting you out of the PMR cycle this trip round. But it will shorten the road because of this differential between how negative and positive feedback works within our selves. So I understand it in any case.

Ted

i agree that everything he says in that presentation makes a lot of sense. however, after reading the forward to the book -where he thanks jz knight- and knowing his practice is in Rainier, WA. -near knight's compound- it seems highly probable that he is a follower of her's -she is the chick that channels the ancient warrior 'ramtha'.

i will still read his book but i'll do so with a good dose of classical skepticism.

ted, i basically derived a conclusion similar to your well written reply -i just didn't know if i was missing something obvious, but i knew if i did overlooked something, you would be a good candidate to bring it to my attention. so thanks for your thoughts!

the whole thing is i have a real problem with 'channelers,' i believe some can do it but i also think there are many hucksters out there. additionally, i don't think that a benevolent path to enlightenment (the low-entropy route) would produce a figure like jz knight who lives like a queen on the riches and adornment of her followers.

i am open to comments if i appear to be overly critical...

Key questions for petty property disputes

Is the financial dispute petty or existential? At the PMR as well well as NPMR ruleset levels, it is normally most efficient to laugh off petty property disputes. If a friend asks for your cloak, give it to him. If a man strikes you on the cheek, give him the other. When a man asks for your car or house, or pulls out a knife, or aims a nuclear missal at you, that's a completely different matter. This sounds like something greater than petty, but not existential (in the sense of "big")...the grey zone.

Is the person part of your social circle or an arms length person. An easy way to parse this out is to divide the world into people you break bread with, vs those you may have only a temporary practical one off interaction. As this is an estranged former friend, it sounds like this is in another grey zone. This pertains to the implied PMR social contract of friends and associates watching each others back and fair trading in favours, and whether this person is part of your social contract circle.

Another aspect of this is friends and relatives who are not fair traders, but are takers, which appears to apply in this scenario. Indeed, you are not helping takers by enabling their anti-social behavior. Takers love to attach themselves to spiritually motivated givers, and givers need to become effective and look beyond intent to how their giving impacts the taker over the longer term as well as the giver's personal sustainability, emotionally as well as financially. With some of these unprofitable associations, I suggest gradual friendly distance. With relationships of duty, having your own Arab spring and taking over leading the relationship rather than being taken advantage of.

Should this go bad, suing is rarely profitable by the lower or higher ruleset, should have all emotion removed from the motivation, and the risk reward should be overwhelming. Consider the emotion and effort that will go into the suit and if your time would be better spent doing something productive. Consider the teaching of the Nazarene and make your best effort to settle before actually going to court, and use this experience to make yourself very very wary of legal entanglements with others. Some people go to court too often, and some people don't go to court when they should. Further, there is nothing more expensive than a cheap lawyer.

Choose your intent the best you can then stop fretting about it.

Ultimately, he sounds like fresh high entropy meat and the system is doing its thing on him, which is apparently negative feedback so that he can eventually wake up to the process. You may wish to brief him on the model and the implications of his behavior, so that when he reaches bottom, he will think of what you have told him, and out of desperation, form a decisive loving Intent toward others.

One thing you do not want to do is interfere with the system's Super High Intensity Training (SHIT) that is directed to him, if he is generally a person of physical and mental capacity, lacking only in quality of consciousness or awareness of his QoC.

If you are a very subtle person, I could imagine you pushing the limit of this and suing him with a noble intent directed at educating him, but this is tricky territory.

I once lent a young friend some money, and they were not paying it back as agreed. It was a lot of money for them, but not for me. My concern was that by forgiving the loan, I was leading them into something damaging to them, so I insisted that the loan be repaid, which was difficult and a challenge for the person, but they did it, and were very proud of this. I then turned around and gifted the money to them, as the point was made and the lesson was learned.

So one tool is to insist on order, discipline and fair exchange to such situations, but remove self interest by directing the benefit of the action to someone other than yourself, if you are in a position to afford this sort of thing.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I had no idea that Dispenza is a Ramtha follower...(How did you arrive at that, BTW?) ... there is no trace of that in his later book, "Breaking the Habit of Being Yourself". I continue to recommend that book as a practical means of developing actionable knowledge on self management of the psyche.

But I agree on the JZKnight / Ramtha thing..... though I have to say I had just a couple quick glances at it (one included a TV expose). My impression was that it was largely or even purely mercenary fraud.

Dispenza comes no closer to flakiness, really, than quantum mechanics (which, I guess, everyone in the know agrees, is lunatic and absurd in the extreme, its only claim to fame being that it works~). The meat of his last book is almost like reading a tech manual, though not quite that dry.

I am not familiar with his first book.

Agree also on channeling in general. Exceptions, pain-in-the-assedly, do occur though~ ;-/

Montana

These situations should be handled just simple and firmly. Don't put to much effort into it. Its a good excersise. The only thing you need to do is say "I think its your responsibility", and nothing more. Try it calmly. Let him say what he says in what manner he says it. But don't excuse your stand. Just say it, and listen, and feel firm about the decision.

Sometimes we talk to much and think to much, when we know this is the only thing we really need to do.

http://www.newsforthesoul.com/tosa.htm scroll down 3 pages or just search the page for 'dispenza'. that website might also have some good interviews...?

nemo, sorry about derailing your thread. i'm done :)

Some people used to believe in god too, but now realize they were just trying to fill in a blank with something and god was the established thing. I do see the utility of having an easy to say word when thanking the LCR or in distress.

I sense the issue is channeling or channeled information, and selling out. I was and am great friends with a couple that regularly left to channel or gather information channeled, actually I have found and contacted them within the last year, information from Jesus who under a different name was in space ship number 10, so...

Channeling was an attempt at getting some information in here that did not go over well, I'd say.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.