12-14-2015, 09:06 PM
(12-14-2015, 06:19 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: It's important to understand that our role in this density is expressly to have the kinds of emotionally charged, socially constructed opinions that those of Ra avoid. So when we hear these kinds of sixth density viewpoints, we have to understand that they come in some ways (me talking here, take with a grain of salt) with a certain amount of remove--not emotional remove, but remove from the socially reinforced norms which are the water we swim in. I'd wager that even if right or wrong are somehow absolutes, how do we recognize them outside the context of the social, political, cultural signposts that are themselves merely props and not the characters themselves? And if these are not the props in Ra's drama, then doesn't that excite one's curiosity about the common threads in both experiences, and what we could learn about unity and eternity through the critical and careful comparison?
That leads me to believe that Ra is right on the money: that it's at least more spiritually usefu (but also more consistent and elegant) to see the kinds of things we usually use "right and wrong" on in terms of energetic and identitarian polarity. By useful I mean: it tells us more about the kind of thing we are and what it means to be a thing like us.
It's important to understand that right and wrong, to the extent we can think about them coherently, are beliefs, models of ideal reality, and not themselves concrete facts (unless you're some kind of fundamentalist). As such, normative beliefs constitute an act of personal volition and, in a way, a kind of creative act, a way I can take responsibility for how I apprehend this third density experience. So if it's all about perspective, in other words viewing different parts of the Creator from different positions, then it would be part and parcel of believing in right and wrong to frequently experience each, and to experience each in different flavors, definitions, etc. The more perspectives we can integrate, the more of the whole we see, and the more of the whole we see, the less need we even have for these norms in their parochial forms.
This is what's so fascinating and special about the ability to converse with beings from beyond our waking experience: of course they would have in some ways a totally alien view of the kinds of things we take for granted. Finding a way to reconcile a spiritual unity with a broken human condition is where all the mystery, magic, love and light lie. In other words: perhaps the goal isn't to figure out the right answer here, but to have compassion for each entity and see their opinions as pieces of a puzzle whose total illustration cannot possibly be countenanced with the few pieces we have.
One way to look at it is: either those of Ra are right, and we need to accept others as self even when they horrify and frighten us because they are literally us in some important way that isn't intuitive or obvious, or they are incorrect and we should discard the opinion and its consequences. Funnily enough, that's precisely what the confederation asks us to do anyway.
Another way to look at it is: maybe there is some sense in which those of Ra have a valid point, and then it becomes: how much use can I make of that perspective in my spiritual path? This seems to me the best way to approach it: to use the imagination and the deep mind to feel out the contours of these thought patterns and find through trial and error where the seams end up consistently.
Your post is badassly excellent sir!