03-03-2016, 05:39 PM
(03-03-2016, 04:57 PM)anagogy Wrote:(03-03-2016, 04:36 PM)Minyatur Wrote: If Ra calls it the path of that which is not, it seems more to hint that Ra as a whole hasn't fully distilled the mirror it is unto itself. What is is what we all are.
Because we know better than a bagillion year old social memory complex that has probably had more experience with negative beings than we will our entire earthly lives?
Are you saying you know more about a concept that was explicated and brought up by Ra in the first place, without which, none of us would even know about this concept in the first place?
Ra does more of giving keys to awaken what is known than actually teach things anew.
(03-03-2016, 04:57 PM)anagogy Wrote: The "path of separation" is called the "path of that which is not" because separation isn't real. STO denies the separation, STS affirms the separation. I don't see the problem or why such revulsion to it being called the path of that which is not.
Perhaps because your words affirm separation rather than denying it.
If you want to speak of what is not then you can talk about all things, manyness included. Even the STO polarity exists only within a certain set of illusions and falseties.