You ask very good questions. Unfortunately, I dont know if I have any "good" answers to any of these, just my thoughts and opinions. Keeping that in mind, I'll give them a shot.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]How do you know the difference between service to self and service to others?
If it is a person that we are talking about, it probably wouldnt be too difficult. Just take a look, a deep look at them. Their lifestyle, their actions, their manner of speaking, their character, their intentions, etc. These things will reveal the truth.
If it is an entity that is not in 3d physical at the moment, it of course gets a little more tricky. At that point, you cannot see their lifestyle, character, etc. so then you have to go from the things that you can see: their message and the feeling/response that they invoke in you. If you think that something is "just not right" even if their message sounds as fluffy and warm hearted as can be, then by all means, cut the connection and go about your merry way. You always have a choice.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]Can every behavior be qualified as STS or STO on its own? Or does context come into play? If you take an absolute context, is it then still possible to qualify the behavior?
This is difficult to say. Rather than looking at behavior, maybe it would help to look at the driving force behind it: intention. Perhaps intention can be qualified as STS or STO on its own, no matter the situation.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]And even if something is clearly STS, is it then bad to encounter this? Isn't the only thing bad or good for you ultimately your own choice?
No, its not bad to encounter something that is STS. There is no bad or good, only what you want and dont want. What always matters more than what you encounter is your reaction/response to it.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]Also if you're unable to see the difference between STS or STO then how can a thought form construct like an armor or shielding made by you see the difference?
Maybe a sort of simple analogy would be that theives tend to avoid well lit places. If you put up lights all around your home it is still not a 100% guarantee that you wont get robbed, but I think that it greatly increases the likelihood that the person who chooses to approach is a businessman and not a thief. These types of preimptive actions could be looked at as a type of preventative measure.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]I've found the concepts STO versus STS invaluable in understanding and catagorizing my own behavior. In choosing who I want to be. But I'm having some problems seeing it in the grander scheme of things.
Here is one way to look at STS and STO in the grand scheme:
------Law of One, Book II, Session 30--------
Questioner: I am going to make a statement and then let you correct it if I
have made any errors. This is the statement: Creation is a single entity or
unity. If only a single entity exists, then the only concept of service is the
concept of service to self. If this single entity subdivides, then the concept of
service of one of its parts to one of its other parts is born. From this springs
the equality of service to self or to others. It would seem that as the Logos
subdivided, parts would select each orientation. As individualized entities
emerge in space/time then I would assume that they have polarity. Is this
statement correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This statement is quite perceptive and correct until the final
phrase in which we note that the polarities begin to be explored only at the
point when a third density entity becomes aware of the possibility of choice
between the concept or distortion of service to self or service to others. This
marks the end of what you may call the unself-conscious or innocent phase
of conscious awareness.
------------------------------
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]In my opinion the sheep is prejudiced against the lion. It is smart in doing so. But the Lion is not a bad creature because of it. It's just not compatible with the sheeps well being. That's a savage garden. Not good not evil. It just is.
This is an interesting statement. Considering this, the intentions of an STS entity and an STO entity are as incompatable as that of the lion and the sheep.
Doesnt make STS "bad", just incompatible with the well being of STO, as you said. Those of the positive polarity still love those of the negative, but also have enough awareness not to get caught in their intentions, which often means avoiding the STS entity all together.
(01-20-2009, 08:29 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]MY question is "Are we perhaps reading too much into the simple concepts of STO and STS?"
I would say no, we are not reading too much into the simple concepts of STO and STS, because they are the way forward. If you are on a road that forks, then if you wish to continue you will have to choose. Eventually the road "comes back together" as it were, but that is not where we are in 3rd density. Here is a simple graphical representation:
1stxxxxx2ndxxxxx3rdxxx4thxxxxx5thxxxxx6thxxxx7th
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-------STO-------
---No Polarity----xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx----------->
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-------STS-------
If you are looking for wiser answers to all of these questions, I would suggest waiting until saturday and asking them to Carla. Being a channeler, its probably a safe bet that she has considered these things a lot more deeply than I.
Be Well,
Kensanwa