Sometimes the Law of One comes under criticism because it expounds upon the concepts of polarity. The term “polarity” or “polarizing” can be a rather emotionally charged and have some baggage attached. In a general sense, I would share a hesitance to the idea of something that promotes “polarization.” For instance, we view the polarization of opinions on controversial topics (such as politics) as a bad thing, right? Polarity as a concept seems to imply a sort of separation. Were I not familiar with Ra’s description of the positive path, I would probably cast prejudgment on the term as well.
Recently I’ve been attempting to reconcile the concepts of non-duality, a concept promoted by many of the great mystics and seemingly enlightened spiritual systems, and the concept of polarity in the Ra material. It seems that those seeking and promoting concepts of non-duality are rather consistently of a positive nature. In my interpretation, non-duality is a perspective of identification with the Creator, a form of contact with intelligent infinity. It is a state of dissolution of the concepts of object and subject, where everything is seen and experienced as unified in nature without division. Descriptions by mystics who experience this state seem to touch upon the peace, joy, and acceptance that I feel are hallmarks of the positive path. To realize and experience a state of non-separation with the world around us and allow it to inform our actions and behaviors in the physical just seems to be a wholly beneficial thing from a spiritual standpoint.
But how does that relate to polarity as described by Ra? Ra encourages polarization in consciousness in the sense of positive and negative paths. The ethical terminology of “service to others” and “service to self” seems to cause some confusion with people who are not familiar with the full explanation within the material. It’s easy to understand how this seems to cause separation of self from others, and imply that one involves loving others with exclusion or at the expense of self, and vice versa for the other. But closer examination of the material will show that in the path of service to others, the self is not excluded, and in fact work upon the self is a central tenet to that particular path. The positive path is an acceptance of and service to all, including the self. On the other hand, the service-to-self path is described in a very specific sense in the material. It is not a simple care or love of the self, but rather has more to do with how one may relate to and use others for the benefit of the self with focus upon control and separation. It is, in fact, a distinctly different thing from the love of self one would find on the positive path.
To a proponent of non-duality, any promotion of polarity may seem incompatible. But doesn’t the idea of non-duality itself imply a polarity? At one end of the polarized spectrum there is non-duality, and at the other there is duality. One could travel this spectrum in either direction, realizing and acting upon realizations of unity or realizations of separation. A person on the positive path will act, either upon faith or upon direct realization, in accordance with unity with self, other-selves, and the world around us. A person on the negative path will act in accordance with separation and control of self, other-selves, and the world.
I feel that this spectrum of non-duality and duality are a slightly variant perspective on the polarization that Ra promotes. I think that the Law of One gives some amazing tools for clearing the barriers in our perception that inhibit realizations of non-duality, and helps us in giving a map for the positive path towards unity. It is in this sense that I think the concepts of non-duality and promotion of polarity can be reconciled. We can see the positive path as one of non-duality, and the negative path as one of duality. I feel the Law of One is even more inclusive, in a sense, in that it promotes an acceptance of the negative polarity as a valid path of spiritual evolution. While it remains the shadow of the positive being, the shadow is to be accepted as all other aspects of the creation.
Would you agree that the positive path is one that tends towards non-duality, or could ultimately result in direct non-dual experiences? Not to say that seekers upon this path will have perfect realization of this unity and non-duality. We’re all on a journey and have our own distortions to work upon, but these distortions are, I think, distortions between the self and non-duality. We may not always have full awareness of when we are not being accepting or service-oriented, but the conscious attempt to clear these distortions and move in the positive direction is a testament to our polarity and the seeking of non-duality.
Does anyone know of any non-dual school of thought which expounds upon the idea that duality and non-duality imply a type of duality through polarity?
Yes, in response to your last question, The Jeshua Chennelings touched on non-duality polarity quite a bit. He explained this type of unity is a very recent creation for veiled entites to experience, and he assisted in ushering in the non-dual "Christed" energy to earth - as we were in a state of spiritual crisis with regard to our evolution - very calcified in our hearts.
I can't type much else of a response as I'm at work, but I love your idea the the Negative/Magnetic is seeking to Understand total Duality within Duality, while the Positive/Radiant is seeking absolute Non-Duality within the spheres of Duality.
If you look at the conditions for positive harvest, it's a minimum of 51% STO and 49% STS. By these percentages alone u can see that a positively oriented entity is actually expressing non-duality (slight STO bias). Its therefore no wonder that positively oriented entities find the extreme focus on STO detrimental since if 51% STO is as hard to reach as 95% STS then most entities trying to polarize positively should in fact be striving towards this 50:50 mix rather than the assumed total STO the idea of polarity seems to imply. I believe this is where the primary confusion comes in regarding polarity and why positives generally espouse a preference for non-duality or service-to-all since it ultimately amounts to the requisites for STO polarization and graduation anyway.
Quote:17.31
Questioner: Thank you very much. I don’t wish to take up extra time by asking questions over again. Some are so important I try to ask some similar questions in different ways to expand on the answer. Seems to be [inaudible] what we’re getting at, maybe not.
In the book Oahspe it states that if an individual is more than fifty percent for others— that is, goes over the 50% service to others, and is less than fifty percent for service to self, then he is harvestable. Is this a correct statement?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct if the harvesting is to be for the positive fourth dimensional level.
(10-05-2015, 07:16 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone know of any non-dual school of thought which expounds upon the idea that duality and non-duality imply a type of duality through polarity?
I do not know of a such a school, but I agree with your conclusions, Austin.
My understanding is that duality does not even exist, except in illusory perception. That is why duality is the path of That Which is Not (STS). It is a pathway of potentiating illusion to its highest degree, because falsity, and the potentials it produces or allows for, is loved above all else. And the STA (service to all) path is the path of That Which Is, because it is transcending the illusion, because truth is loved above all else.
At the end of the day, there is no "better than" or "worse than" there is simply, "different". And each being pursues each path as they follow their heart, their desires, and their bliss in the direction that it calls them.
One path exalts the personal ego, and hails it as a kind of god. The other, worships the Beingness of the All, and recognizes that all is one.
(10-05-2015, 07:16 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ]It is not a simple care or love of the self, but rather has more to do with how one may relate to and use others for the benefit of the self with focus upon control and separation. It is, in fact, a distinctly different thing from the love of self
I'd say this perception of difference is illusion, going in line with your next sentence regarding a scale of polarity (STA/STS) going into nonpolarity or Singularity (Oneness).
I think the act of self control and self manipulation are very well known tools of a STO path that are just not offered in the light of better judgment as is desired. When you say no to yourself or another, or ask another for help in a way that helps mostly just you.
I don't see much difference thought wise. STS (ab)uses for aid, STO uses for aid.
I think Polarity is a nice ruse of catalyst to work through mentally to get to a unified perspective of each polarity as being literally besides energetic mechanics, the same thing. Desires being fulfilled. Identity identifying intelligently parts of itself.
I just don't see this line others do anymore. STS does as they do no different from STO. So one kills and the other sacrifices self. What's the difference? All is one, whether parts of the all are killed by STS actions, or by STO actions, same end result.
I'm using Carla vs 5D neg entity specifically. Both desired in.a sense the same thing just differently. One wanted to kill, the other was prepared to sacrifice self.
Both end results leave a somewhat similar path in its wake.
Its another reason to love and accept STS concepts. Its the will of another. Why negate such by pitching it as different?
Daoism is largely non-dualistic. I actually credit having some grounding in the Dao as why I was able to understand much of the Ra Materials without too much difficulty. I see a lot of parallels between it and the concepts of Intelligent Infinity and Oneness as Ra described them. In a Ra-influenced reading, the Dao te Ching could easily be seen as describing the Creator and its relationship to us.
The concept of Wu-Wei, for example: Action through nonaction. Looking for ways to achieve desired goals through the least possible direct/coercive action. Or, alternatively, coming into such close harmony with nature that one merely desires that which is going to happen anyway.
Quote:In Tao the only motion is returning.
The only useful quality, weakness.
For though all creatures under heaven are the products of Being,
Being itself is the product of Not-being.
This would seem to be a good principle to consider for one looking towards Unity and trying to understand its non-contradictions.
I think its a fairly common theme in most esoterica/mysticism. That after a enough spiritual discipline one can experience a non-dual state of consciousness that is beyond the normal physical senses. The idea of polarity is a common term as well, however the Law of One puts a different spin on it or so it would seem but its just the terminology rather than anything different from what the teachings of old have said.
I agree with your conclusion based upon the simple fact that if duality truly existed as a relevant path back to the Creator, there would be no need for the sts entity to change polarities. When such beliefs in duality consume one to such depths, yet one has no choice but to realize that duality was only an illusion created by the self, one realizes that such a concept was incorrect.
Its what confuses me about the sts path the most. Let's say such an entity was aware of the Law of One yet still believed in their path knowing such a path would eventually cause one to flip, what's the point to begin with? If it's all about self love and absorption of all that there is so that one gains from others misfortune, why would one even consider such duality a valid path to begin with?
(10-06-2015, 05:56 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with your conclusion based upon the simple fact that if duality truly existed as a relevant path back to the Creator, there would be no need for the sts entity to change polarities. When such beliefs in duality consume one to such depths, yet one has no choice but to realize that duality was only an illusion created by the self, one realizes that such a concept was incorrect.
Its what confuses me about the sts path the most. Let's say such an entity was aware of the Law of One yet still believed in their path knowing such a path would eventually cause one to flip, what's the point to begin with? If it's all about self love and absorption of all that there is so that one gains from others misfortune, why would one even consider such duality a valid path to begin with?
Because the merging of the polarities happens some billion years after 3D.
They honestly think the other path is folly.
(10-06-2015, 05:56 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with your conclusion based upon the simple fact that if duality truly existed as a relevant path back to the Creator, there would be no need for the sts entity to change polarities. When such beliefs in duality consume one to such depths, yet one has no choice but to realize that duality was only an illusion created by the self, one realizes that such a concept was incorrect.
Its what confuses me about the sts path the most. Let's say such an entity was aware of the Law of One yet still believed in their path knowing such a path would eventually cause one to flip, what's the point to begin with? If it's all about self love and absorption of all that there is so that one gains from others misfortune, why would one even consider such duality a valid path to begin with?
Consider that for some the positive path does not seem positive.
(10-06-2015, 05:56 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]Its what confuses me about the sts path the most. Let's say such an entity was aware of the Law of One yet still believed in their path knowing such a path would eventually cause one to flip, what's the point to begin with? If it's all about self love and absorption of all that there is so that one gains from others misfortune, why would one even consider such duality a valid path to begin with?
They are interested in the pleasure of the moment, so to speak. You'll find that negative polarization tends to lean towards the lower chakras which are outer world oriented, thus, the negatively polarized tend to enjoy outer pleasures more than STO polarized. The positively polarized, on the other hand are more oriented toward the higher chakras and thus they find inner spiritual pleasures more attractive. The lower energy centers absorb, the upper energy centers radiate. And thus, you have the magnetic potential between the two interactions.
The STS legitimately enjoy the darkness of that path. And also, here's the thing -- and, understandably, it seems to be the hardest thing for people to wrap their heads around: the creator does not frown upon the choice of evil. There is evil and there is good, but there is no right, and no wrong. People shy away from using the words "evil" and "good", but "positive" and "negative" are no different so there is no need to shy away from it. The point is, there is a duality and they are opposite of one another. So "evil" is a legitimate choice of service to the creator. Without evil, there would be no potential for good. Evil literally potentiates good, and good potentiates evil. But like I said, there is no right or wrong when all is said and done. People hate to look at life so frivolously but it is exactly like a videogame where one side is chosen over another all for the fun, drama (insert gamut of possible human emotion) whatever etc.
When the curtain rings up at the end, we are still all ONE just like we always have been.
anagogy, when you say that there would be no good without evil, are you suggesting that there would be no opportunities for entities to aid one another, no challenges to overcome, nothing beautiful and wondrous to be created if there hadn't also been a force actively opposing those efforts?
I can see how without evil the "game" would be more muted, but I think Creation itself is good, whether or not evil exists. Bringing a Universe into existence, creating a caleidoscope of individual perspectives by creating entities, worlds, planets - that is not just good, it's amazing. (Clearly not enough contrast for the Creator's liking, however -- but not the same as there not being good)?
To me, the non-duality path would be good for those who wish to be monks or someone who has no real ambitions to help many others.
When one helps many others, they become a target for STS entities, and thus they need to consider duality to a far greater extent. Jesus, as an example, probably would have wished to be in a state of non-duality, but he helped too many people and therefore he had to become aware of duality.
Consider also how Carla, Jim and Don were attacked while they created the Ra Material. It was important for negative entities to try to stop them because of the significance of the material, and future distribution of that material. So, they had to be on guard - it's hard to be of service to many if a negative entity finds a way to prematurely end your life. If they just had a simple meditation group that didn't do anything of major significance to humanity, they would never have been attacked the way they were..
I think anagogy comes closest to my read of the matter: the introduction of any state "other" is itself the path of "that which is not". The illusion thrives upon duality, and to the extent that we make use of it (i.e. polarize), we are bound to its preconditions and characteristics. One of the things I find so unique about the Law of One philosophy is it's emphasis on the instrumental nature of the illusion. It need not be "overcome" or "transcended" in some grand fashion (like Bhuddists or Christians believe, for example).
In some sense, the paradoxical co-existence of duality and non-duality is the real mystery that the Law of One explores. It is a very Western idea to seek a single, exclusive, universal truth that can put all disputes to rest in a rational manner. The Eastern tradition has an inherent appreciation for the impermanence of fixed, discrete ideas as ends. They see words, concepts, and the like as metaphors that make symbols out of the inconceivable--not laws by which existence is captured and mastered, is known forwards and backwards in some final way.
What I mean by this is that, while it's ever so pat to dismiss this tension you point to as "mystery," I think that's what it is. More and more I accept that I have an intellect that is tied to the illusion. It is built to move within it, but not outside of it. This is why exploring what I call the affective terrain is so important to me now.\
I suspect I'm telling you nothing you haven't thought of before, Austin, but I appreciate your invitation to think along these lines. It's very pleasing to know others ponder these matters--I always figure folks are, but I enjoy those moments when it is not a matter of faith.
(10-27-2015, 05:25 PM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]anagogy, when you say that there would be no good without evil, are you suggesting that there would be no opportunities for entities to aid one another, no challenges to overcome, nothing beautiful and wondrous to be created if there hadn't also been a force actively opposing those efforts?
I can see how without evil the "game" would be more muted, but I think Creation itself is good, whether or not evil exists. Bringing a Universe into existence, creating a caleidoscope of individual perspectives by creating entities, worlds, planets - that is not just good, it's amazing. (Clearly not enough contrast for the Creator's liking, however -- but not the same as there not being good)?
Even in a world without STS there is still "evil" or negativity, or something acting entropic to the free flow of your wants and ambitions. So there would still be challenges to overcome, but as you said, the potentials would be more muted, and less prolific. But without ANY negativity, you wouldn't know good, because it only stands apart in relation to the contrasting backdrop. Pain is the background of all pleasure. Without any negativity you might be dwelling in the most unimaginable pleasure, but you wouldn't experience it as pleasure, because you had nothing to set it apart. You might say that you could still compare one pleasure to a lesser pleasure. The latter pleasure is the new background pain, however. Otherwise there is a monochrome existence. I'm not saying there isn't a kind of peace (absence of conflict or disharmony) that is nondual, but pleasure and pain define each other.
(10-05-2015, 07:53 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2015, 07:16 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone know of any non-dual school of thought which expounds upon the idea that duality and non-duality imply a type of duality through polarity?
My understanding is that duality does not even exist, except in illusory perception. That is why duality is the path of That Which is Not (STS). It is a pathway of potentiating illusion to its highest degree, because falsity, and the potentials it produces or allows for, is loved above all else. And the STA (service to all) path is the path of That Which Is, because it is transcending the illusion, because truth is loved above all else.
I do like the connection between illusion and duality, and definitely agree that duality itself is the illusion in which we have veiled ourselves. What you say here, in connection to my OP, seems to be very congruent with Ra's words here:
100.9"The polarities are both dependent upon a limited viewpoint. However, the negative polarity depends more heavily upon the illusory separation betwixt the self and all other mind/body/spirit complexes. The positive polarity attempts to see through the illusion to the Creator in each mind/body/spirit complex, but for the greater part is concerned with behaviors and thoughts directed towards other-selves in order to be of service. This attitude in itself is full of the stuff of your third-density illusion."
(10-05-2015, 11:49 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]I think the act of self control and self manipulation are very well known tools of a STO path that are just not offered in the light of better judgment as is desired. When you say no to yourself or another, or ask another for help in a way that helps mostly just you.
I'm not really sure I'm following you, but if I am understanding you correctly, I don't really agree. Self-control is explicitly, according to Ra,
not congruent with service-to-other polarization. That's not to say that STO polarizing entities don't utilize self-control and self-manipulation. We all probably do. But they're not behaviors that contribute to positive polarization.
(10-05-2015, 11:49 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]I think Polarity is a nice ruse of catalyst to work through mentally to get to a unified perspective of each polarity as being literally besides energetic mechanics, the same thing. Desires being fulfilled. Identity identifying intelligently parts of itself.
I just don't see this line others do anymore. STS does as they do no different from STO. So one kills and the other sacrifices self. What's the difference? All is one, whether parts of the all are killed by STS actions, or by STO actions, same end result.
Free will being "paramount," the honoring of free will is the difference I see in these two examples you give. Though I will say that I don't see these examples as crystallized realization of either path.
(10-05-2015, 11:49 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Its another reason to love and accept STS concepts. Its the will of another. Why negate such by pitching it as different?
I don't think discerning a difference between the two is at all negating. Recognizing a difference in the two can actually help us love and accept the negative path, as we are more aware of what exactly it is we are loving. Contrast helps us to get a better picture. Without accentuating the contrast, how can we be aware of what it is we claim to (seek to) love?
(10-27-2015, 08:09 PM)ScottK Wrote: [ -> ]To me, the non-duality path would be good for those who wish to be monks or someone who has no real ambitions to help many others.
When one helps many others, they become a target for STS entities, and thus they need to consider duality to a far greater extent. Jesus, as an example, probably would have wished to be in a state of non-duality, but he helped too many people and therefore he had to become aware of duality.
Consider also how Carla, Jim and Don were attacked while they created the Ra Material. It was important for negative entities to try to stop them because of the significance of the material, and future distribution of that material. So, they had to be on guard - it's hard to be of service to many if a negative entity finds a way to prematurely end your life. If they just had a simple meditation group that didn't do anything of major significance to humanity, they would never have been attacked the way they were..
I don't think that non-dual realization necessarily results in a lack of desire to help others. Ra speaks of their own motivation in helping:
14.18 "The One Being of the creation is like unto a body, if you will accept this third-density analogy. Would we ignore a pain in the leg? A bruise upon the skin? A cut which is festering? No. There is no ignoring a call. We, the entities of sorrow, choose as our service the attempt to heal the sorrow which we are calling analogous to the pains of a physical body complex distortion."
I think that the desire to serve becomes more of a natural reaction the more the non-dual reality is recognized, similarly to how a body may heal a wound. We, being the body of the Creator, naturally seek to serve more and more as the we grow in our realization of our innate oneness with the rest of the universe (in other words, piercing the illusion of duality). Each entity is unique in its desire and ability to serve, so it will not always look the same. For some, like monks, perhaps their service is found in solitude. According to Ra, those in solitude can still serve through lightening of the planetary vibration. Many monks also serve through example, teaching, charity, and other types of service. For others, perhaps this service is manifested in helping to establish social structures which honor the oneness of all beings. For others, it may be channeling spiritual information.
Ra said it was the polarity of the working of the Ra contact that attracted the opposite polarity. I think the non-dual nature of Ra's information supports the idea that the positive path is of non-duality. Their continuous advice in helping to cope with the psychic greeting experienced by the group was a consistent request of the group to see the other polarity as of the same Creator. This did not mean that their actions to protect against the negative other-self implied duality, but rather that the effectiveness of the act of protection was imbued and empowered by realization of oneness and love. To be of service, protection was necessary, and so that protection was simply another aspect of the service.
Ra Wrote:The positive polarity attempts to see through the illusion to the Creator in each mind/body/spirit complex, but for the greater part is concerned with behaviors and thoughts directed towards other-selves in order to be of service. This attitude in itself is full of the stuff of your third-density illusion.
That's an interesting quote, implying that there's something about the illusion and manifesting the underlying unity within it through our actions that is important. But, again, I think the ultimate telos of existence is probably something we don't approach with the intellect.
That's so dissatisfying. I suck.
(10-28-2015, 06:00 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]Ra Wrote:The positive polarity attempts to see through the illusion to the Creator in each mind/body/spirit complex, but for the greater part is concerned with behaviors and thoughts directed towards other-selves in order to be of service. This attitude in itself is full of the stuff of your third-density illusion.
That's an interesting quote, implying that there's something about the illusion and manifesting the underlying unity within it through our actions that is important. But, again, I think the ultimate telos of existence is probably something we don't approach with the intellect.
That's so dissatisfying. I suck.
It is sort of a perplexing quote, I think one which I can see both supporting the positive polarity/non-duality viewpoint, but perhaps even negating it. I appropriated it to support my argument, but maybe there's more to it.
You don't suck :exclamation:
(10-28-2015, 05:54 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think that non-dual realization necessarily results in a lack of desire to help others. Ra speaks of their own motivation in helping:
14.18 "The One Being of the creation is like unto a body, if you will accept this third-density analogy. Would we ignore a pain in the leg? A bruise upon the skin? A cut which is festering? No. There is no ignoring a call. We, the entities of sorrow, choose as our service the attempt to heal the sorrow which we are calling analogous to the pains of a physical body complex distortion."
I think that the desire to serve becomes more of a natural reaction the more the non-dual reality is recognized, similarly to how a body may heal a wound. We, being the body of the Creator, naturally seek to serve more and more as the we grow in our realization of our innate oneness with the rest of the universe (in other words, piercing the illusion of duality). Each entity is unique in its desire and ability to serve, so it will not always look the same. For some, like monks, perhaps their service is found in solitude. According to Ra, those in solitude can still serve through lightening of the planetary vibration. Many monks also serve through example, teaching, charity, and other types of service. For others, perhaps this service is manifested in helping to establish social structures which honor the oneness of all beings. For others, it may be channeling spiritual information.
Also in support of your point:
57.
33 Ra: The purpose of clearing each energy center is to allow that meeting place to occur at the indigo-ray vibration, thus making contact with intelligent infinity and dissolving all illusions. Service-to-others is automatic at the released energy generated by this state of consciousness.
(10-28-2015, 06:05 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ] (10-28-2015, 06:00 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]Ra Wrote:The positive polarity attempts to see through the illusion to the Creator in each mind/body/spirit complex, but for the greater part is concerned with behaviors and thoughts directed towards other-selves in order to be of service. This attitude in itself is full of the stuff of your third-density illusion.
That's an interesting quote, implying that there's something about the illusion and manifesting the underlying unity within it through our actions that is important. But, again, I think the ultimate telos of existence is probably something we don't approach with the intellect.
That's so dissatisfying. I suck.
It is sort of a perplexing quote, I think one which I can see both supporting the positive polarity/non-duality viewpoint, but perhaps even negating it. I appropriated it to support my argument, but maybe there's more to it.
You don't suck :exclamation:
My take on that quote is that it's more or less saying "Positive 3D entities tend to judge others based on their outward behavior." Rather than trying to distinguish what is truly at the "heart" of an entity they're observing -the underlying impulses- they instead attempt to judge resulting actions as being pos or neg. But actions simply are as they are, while true positivity or negativity is in the soul, so to speak.
I think a good example of this might be the subset of so-called SJWs who become completely fixated on
language, which is very literally the thoughts directed at Other-Selves. Rather than examining a person's background and philosophy and mindset, they attempt to determine whether someone is racist or sexist or such based only on which words they use. So while these folks undoubtedly desire to be of service to others, they pick a very poor standard of comparison for determining which services to offer. After all, words are almost entirely ephemeral, and "preferred nomenclature" changes nearly as often as the weather these days.
Like, I remember one post in particular that ended up on Reddit's "/r/SRS" community, which is rather infamous for this point of view. An older gentleman (in his 70s iirc) had written a rather lengthy post that detailed how he had been born into a hugely racist time and place, and the struggles he had faced over the course of his life coming to recognize and respect black people as people, rather than seeing them as a scary other/non-person. However, because he still used the word "colored" in his post, he was roundly derided as a racist sh*tlord. All his actual content and meaning was ignored, and he was judged only on a piece of outdated terminology he had never replaced.
That, I think, basically illustrates what Ra was talking about.
Ra Wrote:The positive polarity attempts to see through the illusion to the Creator in each mind/body/spirit complex, but for the greater part is concerned with behaviors and thoughts directed towards other-selves in order to be of service. This attitude in itself is full of the stuff of your third-density illusion.
The quote reads, "The positive entity
attempts X,
but (negation) for the greater part
does Y, which reflects illusion."
I take it to mean that the 'attempts' part is the true goal, and the part following the "but" is what is "full of the stuff of your third-density illusion."
The most prominent difference between the two parts is the unity described in the first part and the multiplicity described in the second: seeing other-selves as other-selves rather than the Creator. I think this is what Ra states is the illusory part that remains even when we serve others as others, rather than as the One Self.
This may be also why Ra suggests seeing the Creator in self and others as the crucial spiritual exercise: it's the less distorted view.
Just to be clear, I don't really think I suck
But I sometimes despair of what use can come from these kinds of contemplations in electronic or interpersonal form, a sort of metaphysical
bikeshedding (this is the same feeling, For what it's worth, that motivated some of my comments in Amherst, Gary and Austin).
The posts following mine demonstrate just how valuable hearing others unique takes on this can be. Although words and concepts have limits, they have triggering or indexing abilities to cut through rigid thinking and open up fresh perspectives. Thanks, everybody!
APW, your comments about SJWs ring particularly true to me as I was involved with Occupy and various far-left groups and have seen this kind of "totalitarian humanism" first hand. I wrote [this essay](
http://www.socialmemorycomplex.net/leftl...rrectness/) in an attempt to wrestle with these issues; would love your feedback. Sorry to hijack!
(10-29-2015, 10:23 AM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]APW, your comments about SJWs ring particularly true to me as I was involved with Occupy and various far-left groups and have seen this kind of "totalitarian humanism" first hand. I wrote [this essay](http://www.socialmemorycomplex.net/leftl...rrectness/) in an attempt to wrestle with these issues; would love your feedback. Sorry to hijack!
You bring up some good points. I especially liked this bit:
Quote:The key is not to defend KKK rallies, or bigoted jokes, or offensive behavior of any kind, but to understand that they cannot be combatted through countervailing oppression, as expedient as that may at first seem. Rather, they can only be genuinely addressed through those mechanisms readily available to us that require neither authority nor privilege. As the saying goes, "the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house".
I had a discussion about this recently with a friend of mine who's (imo) a bit too into identity politics and such, and tends to get lured into arguments over who's oppressing who. The tl;dr is that someone she considered to be among the oppressive was complaining about how he didn't have a 'safe zone' of his own where he can speak without immediately having people jump down his throat.
And she jumped down his throat.
My point was, more or less, increasing the negativity in this situation isn't going to create positive results. It's just going to make the person MORE hostile and paranoid and convinced he lacks a safe place to speak. That isn't going to change his opinions. It's just going to increase his perceived need for a "tribe" of his own. And the more he feels oppressed, the more likely he is to "act out" specifically to repel those he sees as oppressing him.
(I honestly forget the specifics; it was something about him being a bisexual man and feeling like lesbians were the most oppressive towards him, iirc.)
Unfortunately, she was too fixated on thinking he should suffer repercussions from his politically incorrect speech to look at the larger picture, even when I detailed in strictly psychological/behavioral terms how her actions towards him were only reinforcing his negative behaviors, rather than discouraging them. Her desire to create a sense of justice -the ostenisble goal of every SJW- was overriding pragmatic arguments about how to
effectively encourage better behavior. And the shame of it is, I know she's had enough classes in development and psychology to understand what I was talking about in the abstract, but she just couldn't get past that impulse to hurt the bad man, so to speak.
In a world where the old societal structures are breaking down, with folks feeling "lost" and without a people/tribe of their own, it's all too easy for these sorts of negative feedback loops to get started. People end up trying to create new tribes through exclusionary methods, which necessarily inspires the outcast to reject them in turn, which just increases the hostility on both sides without any path towards resolution.
Feel free to split this thread if we're going to far askew, admins.
APW, I couldn't agree more. After a long time on the left and dealing with the narratives of privilege and oppression and identity and all that, I recently came to the realization in a deep way that these are not, at their root, political problems. There's no structure that can substitute for human will, and sociology shows that as soon as out-groups become in-groups they turn the old in-groups into out-groups. Clearly we have to do something different than just pushing narratives and identity groups on people.