Matt, your OP reflects my own journey to understanding faith within my own spiritual practice. As someone who grew up without religion (scorned it, really) the concept of faith baffled me for a long time. Even after my own awakening and reading about faith in the Ra material I couldn't understand what faith was. My only concept for the idea of faith was believing in something without evidence, which seemed to be silly and naive to me.
But when I contemplated the concept of compassion as it fits within the framework of a secular/materialist mindset, something clicked for me. What reason does a materialist have to act in a compassionate way? We exist in a society in which one can shut themselves off to compassion and do very well for themselves, adopting a complete hedonistic attitude despite any worry about the well-being of others. Viewing the world as a cold mechanism to be manipulated actually seems to be the natural conclusion if you take the material objectivist view - and that view is, by definition, the opposite of faith. To believe
only in what we have solid and measurable evidence for is to remove all faith and emotion from one's life. But for some reason there are materialists who choose to approach the cold mechanism from a standpoint of compassion, and what evidence is there to compel this approach?
Secular humanists would certainly make some arguments about the necessity of compassion, but in my perception they are all based on an assumption that human life (or life in general) has a certain value that is worth honoring. That seems to me like a unique departure from the strict materialist mindset. I would argue that the simple assertion, even from the secular materialist's viewpoint, that human life (or just life) is valuable is a statement of faith. There is no evidence (as they would consider it) that life has value beyond just mechanical motions of the universe, and thus suffering or happiness are also just mechanical motions. Yet a secular humanist takes a stance of morality and ethics despite the lack of evidence of innate value in anything. They would scorn me for saying it but that, to me, is faith.
This extreme example of faith from the complete materialist view helped me realize what faith was within my own spiritual framework: choosing compassion despite any real evidence that it was it was a significant choice to make. Of course we have the Confederation's statements from what we believe to be a higher perspective that tells us that the compassionate choice
is significant and does result in a sort of metaphysical progress. But if we act in compassion based only on the assumption that we'll get a metaphysical reward, is that really compassion? I would say no. I think the compassion Ra speaks of, the Choice of service to others, is the result of a fully acknowledging that we lack any real, tangible, solid reason to choose compassion - yet we do so anyways.
16.39:
Quote:Questioner: I am assuming it is not necessary for an individual to understand the Law of One to go from third to fourth density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.
That is not to say that the choice can't be made within a spiritual framework in which such metaphysical consequences of choice are spelled out, but more of a statement about the relationship we have to such dogma. That is the value of the Law of Confusion and the veil, I think. The murky conditions of third density allow us to seek within our own hearts to establish our relationship to the rest of the universe instead of simply adopting an external ideology or framework of morality. Such ideologies can help that internal seeking, but it is ultimately a choice that we must make ourselves rather than a choice that is made for us through the framework.
This line of thinking has helped me grasp what faith ultimately meant to me: making compassionate choices for the sake of compassion and not simply for the sake of our souls. The self-sought and self-affirmed belief that, despite all outward appearances and evidence, the compassionate choice is a worthy choice.
I think this is ultimately what Ra was talking about in the poker analogy:
50.7
Quote:Questioner: Thank you. Can you expand on the concept which is this: that it is necessary for an entity to, during incarnation in the physical as we call it, become polarized or interact properly with other entities and why this isn’t possible in between incarnations when he is aware of what he wants to do, but why must he come into an incarnation and lose memory, conscious memory of what he wants to do and then act in a way that he hopes to act? Could you expand on that please?
Ra: I am Ra. Let us give the example of the man who sees all the poker hands. He then knows the game. It is but child’s play to gamble, for it is no risk. The other hands are known. The possibilities are known and the hand will be played correctly but with no interest.
In time/space and in the true-color green density, the hands of all are open to the eye. The thoughts, the feelings, the troubles, all these may be seen. There is no deception and no desire for deception. Thus much may be accomplished in harmony but the mind/body/spirit gains little polarity from this interaction.
Let us re-examine this metaphor and multiply it into the longest poker game you can imagine, a lifetime. The cards are love, dislike, limitation, unhappiness, pleasure, etc. They are dealt and re-dealt and re-dealt continuously. You may, during this incarnation begin — and we stress begin — to know your own cards. You may begin to find the love within you. You may begin to balance your pleasure, your limitations, etc. However, your only indication of other-selves’ cards is to look into the eyes.
You cannot remember your hand, their hands, perhaps even the rules of this game. This game can only be won by those who lose their cards in the melting influence of love; can only be won by those who lay their pleasures, their limitations, their all upon the table face up and say inwardly: “All, all of you players, each other-self, whatever your hand, I love you.” This is the game: to know, to accept, to forgive, to balance, and to open the self in love. This cannot be done without the forgetting, for it would carry no weight in the life of the mind/body/spirit beingness totality.