Do you ever send 'vibes' to people who might not want them?

[Orrex]

For instance, if I--an established skeptic and charming man-about-town--were to fall on hard times and DU found out about it, would you be inclined to send vibes even though you're likely able to guess my thoughts about such sendings?

Or if a coworker (and friend) belonged to a faith that considers vibes to be anathema, would you still send them?



Not being funny here--the quesion is put forth in all seriousness.

[I Have A Dream]

1. If I knew that the person would not want them, no -- I would not send them. (see exception below)

Additionally, I always send them with the understanding that they are to be received in a way that the receiver can handle and finds acceptable. If the person is against such things without my knowing it, my intention is that they not be impacted in any way. I strongly believe in free will.

There have been times when I've asked that the person be surrounded by light so that it is there to be used if they so choose. I tend to think of it as an available source that might help them in some way.

Oh, one exception that I do have is when someone is hurting someone else. At that point, I don't feel that there is any ethical reason to not do everything possible to encourage that person to stop.

(On edit: If I were to send "vibes" to a skeptic, it would be good wishes.)

[Kind of Blue]

2. Hey, Orrex. Man-about-town conjures up

a certain imagery for me, in that I'm thinking Hugh Hefner, the Rat Pack, F. Scott Fitzgerald and the jazz age, affording recreational drugs, alcohol, whoring around, plain old decadence :rofl: So I'd be inclined not to send vibes for more of the same lifestyle that brought you down.

To me skeptic, which I consider a good thing, I think it's more of a matter of the receiver than about the sender. I mean, you can't get F.M. on an A.M. radio, therefore an unreceptive person isn't very likely to receive any telepathic or empathic influence through their thick skull.

I assume the faith part of the question is a reiteration of the skeptic, man-about-town question so it gets the same answer - more about the receiver and not external transmissions.

[Orrex]

3. I envisioned more of a well-traveled-stranger kind of thing

But I guess your image fits the phrase, too. Hmm...


Still, would you send the vibes, even if the intended recipient couldn't receive them?


Thanks for the answer!

[Kind of Blue]

5. Oh, well-traveled stranger type.

Well, I guess my first instinct would be the desire to send. Couldn't receive, I'd send. Does not want to receive then automatically, I'd stop myself. It's automatic shutdown for me because sending occurs in steps, it's a whole process of getting within the correct frame of mind and absolute spirit of goodwill.

[MorningGlow]

4. All the time

But as Dream said, I send them in an open manner--to be received as the person's higher (spiritual) self prefers to accept them. Also, vibes are sent with no specific outcomes attached. Instead, they are sent "for the highest good/best outcome, harming none."

It's kind of like the habit people have of saying a prayer when they hear a fire alarm or see an ambulance race by; nobody knows the faith of those whose house is burning or who's in the ambulance, but vibes sent with a good intention for the best outcome for the person in question is neutral enough to be filtered and accepted in the proper manner.

Question for you: If you, an established skeptic and charming man-about-town, were to fall on hard times and DU found out about it, and someone said, "Gee, man, I'm so sorry to hear about your problems; I sure hope they get cleared up soon," would you reject those good thoughts? Because it amounts to the same thing--sympathy (possibly empathy) for a person in trouble, with good wishes shared out of a sense of compassion for one's fellow man/woman.

[Orrex]

6. That's a great question! And, being the prepared fellow that I am, I have a great answer!

We've actually discussed this over in the Skeptics' group, as well as what one of "us" might post in an asking-for-vibes-thread.

The informal consensus was that a statement along the lines of "we're thinking of you" or "you have our best wishes" is, at its essence, different from a statement like "I'm sending vibes," because the first two are entirely internal to the poster, while the last one describes a sort of projection. In practice, I know that it's a subtle distinction, but I think that it's important--perhaps moreso to the skeptic than to one who embraces all such expressions more or less equally.

Perhaps "projecting" vibes in this sense rings a little too close to principles of alternative healing that skeptics find questionable. I won't bicker about them here, though the similarity is relevant in this context. Perhaps it's just an overlap of semantics, but it feels hypocritical to reject one form of "vibes" or "vibrations" while evoking a thematically similar form.

To answer your direct question, I'm not so much of an asshole that I would reject someone's good wishes truly given. It would be akin to spitting on someone's sincere apology, and at the very least it would be rude. Some might feel that this amounts to humoring the sender, but I think that it's more a matter of applying a different context to the sender's message, and accepting his or her good wishes with their intended meaning.

However, if someone were kind of a jerk about it, ostentaciously using insincere "wish-vibes" in an attempt to mock my non-belief (especially during a time of hardship or vulnerability), then I would probably ignore the jerk or--if I were feeling combative--blast him or her with one of my famous and world-shaking zingers.

I should add, however, that it can be bothersome to a non-believer when people willfully disregard that non-belief in inappropriate contexts. For instance, when my first son was born, my coworkers gave me a lovely congratulatory card that they'd all signed. A few of them, however, included very pointedly Christian messages, such as direct bible citations or heavy-handed "God is watching over you" kinds of things. My atheism was no secret at work, and in fact it was something of a sideshow curiosity, so in that context it struck me as culpably insensitive to include such overtly religious sentiments. IMO the sentiment should reflect the giver's values but should also respect those of the recipient.

Here's a similar, though reversed, example: In the Lounge a few weeks back I mentioned that if I were to sign such a card, I wouldn't add "congratulations on a successful birth subsequent to copulation in this rudderless universe of ours." I would, of course, consider it a crass thing to write in that context because it would serve no purpose but to offend the beliefs and sensibilities of the recipient.

[crikkett]

15. A flower doesn't project its scent.

Its scent is intrinsic to the flower's nature, and it's carried by the breeze. The flower may wish for a bee, and the wish may be only the flower's self-interest, but everyone in the vicinity can enjoy the pleasant effects of that wish.

So then is a person's goodwill.

When you curse a Christian for blessing you in the way that they know how, you're cursing yourself, and holding your nose when you could enjoy the scent of a flower.

I never refuse a blessing.

[MorningGlow]

17. I don't think good wishes vs. vibes are different, but I understand where you're coming from

I was raised Catholic, but I was never really drawn to the faith (although I did try for a while). After I gave up being Catholic and for some time afterward, as I went through a phase of seeking a belief system and then becoming a witch/pagan, I was very down on the Catholic religion--very critical. Whenever my aunt, an uber-fundie-Catholic (ultra conservative of the RC variety), said "I'll pray for you," I took offense. It came across as superior and sanctimonious, loaded with the implication that only her religion was a real religion, and only her prayers had any merit. And if she was praying for me, it seemed, she was being condescending about it.

However, since then--after many more years of study, spiritual experiences, just more...life--I've changed my mind. I realize that whatever negativity I applied to it was my own perception. People like my aunt may think that only their religion counts, but good wishes of any sort, under any religious banner, are meant with the best intentions. If they're not, they won't stick anyway.

However, you have every right not to accept people's vibes or prayers, of course. That's your right as an individual of free will. But...one more thing to think about (although you may disagree)...I have learned along the way that even if you, as a sentient 3D being, reject healing, vibes, or whatever energy is offered to you, your higher self will accept them and apply them as needed. ;)

[Celebration]

7. No, I don't

But, even the skeptical friends of mine generally are okay with it, just to humor me, figuring it won't work but it can't hurt. It's a way a lot of people become unskeptical in fact. They start with that attitude, and then figure out it works.

But I always get permission. And, really, I don't generally pray for people or anything like that. I mean, that's pretty annoying, in fact. Very annoying. But do I try to get permission sometimes when people are aomewhat reluctant? Sometimes I do. I try not to be pushy or anything.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

8. No

I only pray for those who ask for it or if a close relative requested it--and then I'm praying for the family as well.

[Kookaburra]

9. Doesn't hurt anyone to send out light

If you make the conscious choice not to accept it, that's fine, the light will go where it's needed and wanted. It's all energy anyway, so regardless of how it's termed (light, vibes, prayers, best wishes, etc.) it the same thing.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. One more comment

I realize your example was about you, but I wanted you to know that, as a believer, if I fell on hard times and, say, some fundamentalist Christians found out about it and offered prayers, I would accept, even if this same group held an anti-Muslim position. Why? Because I feel that the energy of compassion is in and of itself pure, and I would therefore appreciate the gesture.

On the other hand, if someone wished me ill, it would be very important not to get angry at them, for that opens up a vulnerability to the ill wishes. This is why it is important to stay calm and centered (something that can, at times, be difficult)--wishing the ill-wisher peace protects yourself, but only if it is sincere. If you look at this strictly from a psychological and physiological view, you can perhaps see the wisdom in doing this, because it brings down stress levels in your body, which can only help your health.

[Orrex]

11. Just to clarify...

Although my example was indeed about me, I should stress that it was hypothetical!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

12. Oh, I understood that

I was thinking your example was more about skeptics in general, which is why I was commenting on how a believer would act. I'm glad that you have not fallen upon hard times. :)

[BanzaiBonnie]

13. It is the way of my people

My practice tells me that if something comes to my attention, that I am part of the problem and the solution. I am not separate. Something within me is part of the problem and it's my responsibility to correct that part. Clean and clear. Make it right. That's Ho'oponopono.

[crikkett]

14. Isn't it a matter of semantics?

In the latter case, no I wouldn't 'send vibes', out of respect, if I knew about the person's belief.

I would however, wish them well, if they were in trouble. People welcome that. Isn't that the same thing?

And if someone asks me to pray for them, I would. Not necessarily to the entity they want me to pray to, but then people don't ask you to pray to God or Horus or the West Wind for them, just to pray for them.

I think that praying, wishing, blessing and sending vibes, if done sincerely, are identical physical processes. Someone tell me, if I'm wrong.

[Celebration]

18. I think the distinction is

Opt in or Opt out?

When I send love, light, or prayers, or good wishes, or something very general, I usually assume that people don't mind that. And, I will go on and do it.

However, if I specifically know that someone doesn't want that, I don't do it.

This may or may not be effective-- a lot of it depends on numbers of people participating.

In that case, everyone is assumed to be "opt in" unless I know that they opt out.

But, on the other hand, for more detailed "invasive" intentions for another person, or intentions that are *amplified*, known as distance treatments, except for the most basic kind, I assume people are "opt out". Then, I would specifically want permission to do that.

[amitten]

16. I often send "vibes" to complete strangers, if they look sad. n/t

[katty]

19. the consciousness we live is sending vibes out all the time

[BlueIris]

20. I have found that there is no point in trying to send positive energy to those who don't want it.

So, no, usually I won't. One exception involved a psychopath who was trying to invade Iran, and I did try to emote positive energy in his direction even though couldn't imagine he wanted any. Didn't help as far as I could tell, and I was left feeling creeped out as a result.

[LiberalEsto]

21. I try hard not to

It has to do with the way I interpret the Wiccan faith. The main rule of Wicca is "An (as long as) ye harm none, do what ye will." The spiritual challenge is in how one defines harm.

Marion Weinstein, who wrote "Positive Magic" many years ago, includes in her definition of harm the manipulation of others against their will or consent. This means that one does not do magic for another person without their permission, no matter how beneficial it might be. One does not do spells to gain another person's love, because this involves manipulating another person without their consent. Weinstein's interpretation requires thoughtfulness in all actions, including magical actions.

Her book was required reading by the person who instructed me. It is well worth reading.

http://www.amazon.com/Positive-Magic-Self-Help-Marion-Weinstein/dp/0960412875

[Why Syzygy]

22. Whether you know it or not,

you've been the recipient of 'vibes' (vibrations). Some replies have touched on this.

When you are in the presence of someone of good cheer, happy, loving, those qualities exist as what we call "vibes". That is what they are projecting. Similarly, in the presence of an angry, bitter person, THOSE "vibes" will be present. A lot of alt. people don't like to differentiate between "good" and "bad", but the truth is some energy is healthy and beneficial, and some is not. We still live in a dual world. Some "good" things can come from seemingly "bad" situations, but that is a case of the negative/harmful potential being turned to into positive/healing energy/vibes and consequences.

In those instances, it is one's own consciousness which determines if they are going to pick up on the vibes being projected. Anger, resentment, bitterness can block all manner of loving vibes/sensation. If someone has ever "cheered you up", you got vibed, baby! In some energy/healing work, there is an intention/effort for two or more to work together to selectively focus their vibrations on a hopeful outcome.

Your question contains a flawed presumption, and that is that we are all separate entities, free agents and solo travelers. This is also the cause of the mistake skeptics make when they intimate that folks like us believe all things natural are "good". That attitude assumes we are idiots. We know that in nature some plants, animals, minerals are poison! And even that some things which are beneficial can be misused in such a way as to cause harm. The accurate term to describe our philosophy is "holistic". Our initial approach in any area presupposes a unity of our mind, body and spirit (breath), the very fabric of all that is. And, not only "our" unity, but unity of the whole. Think butterfly affect.

Holistic practitioners do not treat one symptom. This is where our breakdown with allopathic "medicine" begins. Pharmaceutical scientists set about to treat one or two symptoms of the entire body/mind/spirit, and this often leads to bad consequences. All of us are part of a unit, but we all have our own unique expression within that unit. I would guess skeptics dispute the holistic view. But would they dispute that we are all of one breath and one DNA? "Spirit" means "breath". We all breathe the same air. As long as we continue to breathe, we are connected in life. Spirit is deeper than that because it also exists in the ether realm. That's the part that can't be objectively observed or measured. But, it is that part that makes it possible to share in the vibes of each other, whether for health or for ill. And, what affects one affects us all. Butterfly again.

If someone is projecting healthy, loving vibrations, they are available for you. I do think it's important to distinguish between sending out "prayers" or what not in an effort to affect another's free will. As everyone else has described, we do not do it. It must always be for the health and love of all (and especially *target*). Unselfish love is never harmful. If someone is trying to send "vibes" in order to influence your actions, they are hurting themselves. Likewise, when one is in the vicinity (even the www) of someone vibrating bitterness and hate, they are available for you. Just dip in! Or not.

Now. Having said all that, certain practices are forbidden by their own ethics from being used in certain ways. Reiki practitioners are taught to always have permission before sending. You can be reasonably certain that no one has ever sent you Reiki unless you asked them to!

[MorningGlow]

23. Beautifully put, WS

Really wonderful post. :applause: :toast: :hug: