The issue of responsibility is always topical and often people are held responsible, in every situation. Responsibility for the very meaning of a word is a condition in which there is an answer. And English “response-ability” is an opportunity or condition in which there is an answer or an opportunity to respond. Otherwise as guilt too, responsibility is also a heavy emotional burden imposed on a man’s back because of his ignorance.
Example 1: A parent should vaccinate a child. He/She believes in the system and thinks vaccination is very important and respects the vaccination calendar completely, taking the baby to the doctor on a regular basis. Such a parent is, of course, a very responsible parent, a pillar of society and one to be relied upon.
Example 2: A parent should vaccinate a child. However, she/he does have information that makes the vaccine extremely harmful because it produces no results, only problems. The more she/he studies literature, the statements of people, the less trusts to the system. She/he breaks down within her/himself because of conflicting programs and ultimately out of love for her/his child and responsibility, she/he decides not to vaccinate own child. Such a parent, but also the child, becomes harassed, mocked. However, the parent acted because of own responsibility. Because if he/she had done otherwise, he/she would have betrayed him/herself and because of cowardice declared him/herself an irresponsible selfish invertebrate.
The parent in the first example will call the second one irresponsible because it endangers the health of the child, while the call the second one will be held responsible at a higher level and the first one will be considered irresponsible because he/she takes all information for granted without checking, thus endangering the health of the child.
Thus, both parents showed responsibility in accordance with their perceptions and worldviews.
Responsibility is therefore a mental category because it depends on the content of the mind and its interpretation. If there is a goal or intention there is a responsibility. But since the ego has very little information and a very narrow view of reality, its responsibility is actually child’s play. Bullshit, as they would say in Dalmatia. What can the ego being programmed be responsible for? Just to follow the program. But since it doesn’t know it’s programmed, it can’t even be held responsible. The ego is a fantasy, so responsibility is a fantasy, but that does not prevent the consciousness that has taken the program to believe in fantasy and project it into reality as something that exists.
The ego can only give an answer if it has learned it and through what it has learned. For this reason, in the first category of parents, all those in the second category are irresponsible, because there is no program in their head that says it is better not to vaccinate children.
There is no ultimate responsibility because there should be someone (some-body) who is responsible and some (thing) for which it is responsible. Responsibility exists only within the u-speech, that is to say, between the master and the servant who has committed to obey the contract. Without contractuality and assent, there is no responsibility. Ir-response-ability is an act that does not respect contractuality. If you don’t have any contract and assent with anyone, you don’t have any responsibility. You are only responsible to yourself. But since there are no two of „I“, there is no one to be responsible for. Responsibility exists only in relation with someone, where two or more parties – a business relationship, are in a dual world. So when someone calls you for accountability, check what kind of contract you have with the caller. In the world of Oneness (contract-less world), there is no responsability, because there is no one to hold anyone s responsible.
Yet the ego is very much attached to these concepts and makes life hell. As the ego knows nothing, neither can it be held responsible. It won’t admit it.
Both parents are right according the program. However, the parent in Example 2 understands parent # 1 because he/she was in that situation, but the first one does not understand the other. In terms of system, things are clear. The first parent demonstrated responsibility because he/she respects contract; agreement. The second one, in contrast to the first one, does not respect contract and assent and will bear the consequences for violations of contract. (The system does not recognize the story of child’s health because it has nothing to do with the contract. The proof is that when you pay a penalty for breach of contract, you have paid your debt and you do not have to vaccinate the child).
Imagine now parents who have understanding on Step 9.
Ultimately, the one with the greatest knowledge and understanding has a greater responsibility, because he/she sees what others do not see, to the point where he/she completely rejects it.
Does this mean that I promote irresponsibility. Of course not, I’m just suggesting that you change the field of action. Do not act from contractually, responsible initiatives. Act out of Love because It cannot be contracted and does not ask for any compensation. Love will never hold anyone responsible. You will never get by any contract, what Love can give to you.