War and polarity according to Ra

[Ankh]

How do you guys explain the mentions of trauma in the same paragraph? Within the context of the paragraph, it doesn't make sense that trauma would occur from abstaining from bellicose actions unless you have an intense blood lust.

If I would be an editor of this quote, I would break it differently, like this:

Finally, one may polarize very strongly [fourth ray] by expressing the principle of universal love at the total expense of any distortion towards involvement in bellicose actions. In this way the entity may become a conscious being in a very brief span of your time/space.

This [=war] may be seen to be what you would call a traumatic progression. It is to be noted that among your entities a large percentage of all progression has as catalyst, trauma.

As I understand this whole 34.14 quote: one *may* polarize *somewhat* towards the positive if one preserves/saves other selves, which is *not* to say that one is taking bellicose actions towards yet another self when saving those other others.

Furthermore, as I understand this "expressing the principle of universal love" in both this quote and in relationship to for instance general Patton, fighting when seeing universal love, is a rejection of the Law of Responsibility:

The sum total of this incarnation vibrationally was a slight increase in positive polarity but a decrease in harvestability due to the rejection of the Law or Way of Responsibility; that is, seeing universal love, yet still it fought on.

So my understanding is that, yes, it is *perhaps* possible to polarize *somewhat* towards the positive if you are fighting in some way during the war *when* you are saving someone, but - it is *not* expression of universal love. Because as I understand the above quote - if you are seeing universal love, you can not continue fighting... :/