Ra talks about Love/Light and Light/Love, and Teach/Learning - Learn/Teaching. There is a precedent for dualities actually being in some sense inseparable from their opposite, but, rather, manifesting with one of the two qualities being more prominent, the other more subtly inherent.
It then occurred to me that perhaps Win/Losing and Lose/Winning works in the same way. I am here referring specifically to the context of conflict and antagonistic interactions in general.
I can see most clearly how, in antagonism, a loss is inherent in a win. If we are One, we are harming ourselves.
Metaphysically, I recall a time when I consistently entertained some mildly violent fantasies (against some other person(s)). I noticed a growing blockage in a chakra and began to have the suspicion that the two were linked. As I focused on it in an attempt to heal it, a figure (very clearly a part of me) asked me why I kept hurting it. To me, it was an incredibly powerful lesson in Oneness (and yet another reason why I don't subscribe to Ra's notion of living out your dark fantasies in the imagination).
Maybe, then, when we "lose" a conflict, we are also in some sense the winner.
Perhaps more accurately, the whole Win/Lose - Lose/Win is one metaphysical object, and as long as we're embroiled in that dynamic, there is no real difference which side of it we may be on - we're still mired in that ultimately inefficient and disharmonious paradigm.
I can see Love as being most clearly the opposite of this. It's the way out of zero-sum - the only way to truly win without also losing. Love inherently recognizes the underlying oneness of such dualities and therefore transcends them.
(Which, perhaps, brings us to the duality of Love/Winlose and Winlose/Love, which may be one way of expressing the fundamental polarity of this octave.)
Do you think it is possible to love someone while simultaneously antagonising them? I do and I do. "The Battle" fundamentally underpins the entire polarised experience. I see it as something to embrace. If one has made it to godhead from this logos without ever having been a warrior or having engaged in battle of some kind, I would question why they ever bothered partaking in the first place. It is not the winning/losing which bewilders the supreme intelligence of the soul in each of us, but rather the attachment to result.
"When two warriors meet, the one without an enemy shall always win." - Laozi
What do you think? I recently invited all forum-partaking entities to criticise me and my thinking, so please tell me honestly and without restraint how you view this particular mode of thought, without fear of consequence or backlash.
I appreciate the invitation to honesty, MangusKhan. I think we are designed to long for the harmony of peace and ultimate connectedness, which is the original state of Consciousness. We are designed to long for a return to this state. It is the state within which the One Creator dwells. Perhaps bored with it, the Creator chose to explore various perturbations of that state - in the same way that the mirror-like stillness of a pond is beautiful, but patterns of intersecting ripples when it is disturbed are interesting and perhaps even mesmerizing. The Creator chose to be absorbed in the ripples, but ultimately we are meant to make the Great Journey Home.
It is appropriate for young children to enjoy the simple toys. But as children outgrow the simpler toys and long for something richer, so we too eventually outgrow and become bored or weary with the conflicts and hassles of 3D disharmony and want to move on.
That path seems to lie in less antagonizing and more loving. Antagonizing is imperfect loving, in my realization. It's disharmony that creates friction. It can be fun for a while, but feels so good to transcend.
(11-11-2017, 10:14 AM)MangusKhan Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think it is possible to love someone while simultaneously antagonising them? I do and I do. "The Battle" fundamentally underpins the entire polarised experience. I see it as something to embrace. If one has made it to godhead from this logos without ever having been a warrior or having engaged in battle of some kind, I would question why they ever bothered partaking in the first place. It is not the winning/losing which bewilders the supreme intelligence of the soul in each of us, but rather the attachment to result.
"When two warriors meet, the one without an enemy shall always win." - Laozi
What do you think? I recently invited all forum-partaking entities to criticise me and my thinking, so please tell me honestly and without restraint how you view this particular mode of thought, without fear of consequence or backlash.
"When two warriors meet, the one without an enemy shall always win." - Laozi
The one without any enemies
within shall always win. Externally there can always be what seems to be an enemy, but if you have no enemies within, the external version of that will have no damaging capabilities of a fatal or severe nature, and most times any successful attacks will be just severe enough to teach said person something of value.
Also, you still got something in your stache man. lol.
Following up on the original post - it may be useful to remain mindful of which side of the Love/Winlose - Winlose/Love polarity we're playing out at any given time, as we go through our day. We all know, I think, how Love feels, and how irritating Winlose/Losewin feels. And if we realize that even Win carries Lose with it, the choice becomes even clearer.
But then catalyst comes up. People's actions will often pull us strongly towards Winlose/Losewin. Someone makes an antagonizing move and our ego leaps up to respond in kind, even if only with anger and resentment -- but even if we don't aggress, we're still in the conflict-ridden mind-space.
Egos are very sensitive to perceived aggression, and don't understand Love. Egos enjoy getting sucked into conflict and try to gain the upper hand. Which is also the lower hand, unfortunately (Win/Lose = Lose/Win) but egos don't get that. They're part of social animal consciousness, steeped in hierarchy, social status and survival needs. So if we want to be free, this is where Spirit needs to step in and gently redirect us back toward the path of harmony - even with those who would choose to attempt to suck us into their ego-games. Especially with them.
Hence, love thy enemies. Because then, as Laozi apparently realized, you will have no enemies.
(11-11-2017, 10:37 AM)Turtle Wrote: [ -> ]Also, you still got something in your stache man. lol.
Humorous post, but Genghis's stache is in good form...
(11-11-2017, 10:30 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]I appreciate the invitation to honesty, MangusKhan. I think we are designed to long for the harmony of peace and ultimate connectedness, which is the original state of Consciousness. We are designed to long for a return to this state. It is the state within which the One Creator dwells. Perhaps bored with it, the Creator chose to explore various perturbations of that state - in the same way that the mirror-like stillness of a pond is beautiful, but patterns of intersecting ripples when it is disturbed are interesting and perhaps even mesmerizing. The Creator chose to be absorbed in the ripples, but ultimately we are meant to make the Great Journey Home.
It is appropriate for young children to enjoy the simple toys. But as children outgrow the simpler toys and long for something richer, so we too eventually outgrow and become bored or weary with the conflicts and hassles of 3D disharmony and want to move on.
That path seems to lie in less antagonizing and more loving. Antagonizing is imperfect loving, in my realization. It's disharmony that creates friction. It can be fun for a while, but feels so good to transcend.
Thank you for this thoughtful response. You have written truthfully and poetically. I guess I'm kind of stuck between worlds at the moment. I still desire the thrill of battle and the uncertainty of the gamble, childish amusements indeed. For some time yet I am going to launch arguments and throw punches, all charged with the love which is ever present, wishing nothing more than for my opponents to enjoy the thrill as I do. I'll try to keep it off B4 though.
(11-11-2017, 10:58 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]Following up on the original post - it may be useful to remain mindful of which side of the Love/Winlose - Winlose/Love polarity we're playing out at any given time, as we go through our day. We all know, I think, how Love feels, and how irritating Winlose/Losewin feels. And if we realize that even Win carries Lose with it, the choice becomes even clearer.
But then catalyst comes up. People's actions will often pull us strongly towards Winlose/Losewin. Someone makes an antagonizing move and our ego leaps up to respond in kind, even if only with anger and resentment -- but even if we don't aggress, we're still in the conflict-ridden mind-space.
Egos are very sensitive to perceived aggression, and don't understand Love. Egos enjoy getting sucked into conflict and try to gain the upper hand. Which is also the lower hand, unfortunately (Win/Lose = Lose/Win) but egos don't get that. They're part of social animal consciousness, steeped in hierarchy, social status and survival needs. So if we want to be free, this is where Spirit needs to step in and gently redirect us back toward the path of harmony - even with those who would choose to attempt to suck us into their ego-games. Especially with them.
Hence, love thy enemies. Because then, as Laozi apparently realized, you will have no enemies.
Again more wisdom. I guess I'm just not ready to let go of this mode of being, which I feel to be so deeply a part of me. I find I simply cannot sit on the mountain and watch. Do wanderers not come here to affect change? How can you simply watch? Does no part of your being call you to fight or find elation in the battle? Do you not want to be a hero? Do you not want to look back on your life and laugh and laugh at the dynamic happenings?
These are questions which I often contemplate. Jesus fought, he did not sit under a tree drinking vinegar. He never harmed anyone (except that kid he petrified...), but he fought nonetheless. And what of Krishna? The epics describe him counselling Arjuna and urging him towards battle, lest the kingdom fall to wickedness and chaos. "Do thou fight for the sake of fighting". If you can stand up for something, then you should.
What does it mean to follow your deepest path, as Ra alludes to Jesus not doing by accepting martyrdom? I believe it means to become involved and affect change to the greatest extent that you can. If Jesus had accepted the Honour/Duty/Privilege of governing others, as Krishna had done, perhaps this whole world would now be a better place.
(11-11-2017, 11:25 AM)MangusKhan Wrote: [ -> ]Again more wisdom. I guess I'm just not ready to let go of this mode of being, which I feel to be so deeply a part of me. I find I simply cannot sit on the mountain and watch. Do wanderers not come here to affect change? How can you simply watch? Does no part of your being call you to fight or find elation in the battle? Do you not want to be a hero? Do you not want to look back on your life and laugh and laugh at the dynamic happenings?
These are questions which I often contemplate.
Mangus, I can only speak for myself; we all need to find our own direction and answers. I want to be happy. I want life to feel effortless and joyful. I am weary of the struggle; it bores and annoys me.
I think this has been the case for many throughout history. The Buddha wanted to be done with it, and many other teachers. They are simply offering a way out of being stuck in the endless wash cycle, for those who want it. I know I want it. I'm sure it's not for everyone.
Of course I do recognize the grief around me, and want to do my part to alleviate it. I've found, however, that I am most effective at this - and at everything I attempt, actually - the more I am able to remain in the Love-space and out of the conflict-space. And today I've understood why - if Win/Lose = Lose/Win, choosing to remain in that game is simply busywork. Love is what heals, so that's the road I'm choosing to take, against the (very strenuous!) objections of the incomprehending ego, to which it feels like if I'm not winning, then I must be losing. But I know better.
This discussion reminds me of why I enjoy Battlefield so much.
I played a close quarters level exclusively for a while. I found that sometimes in losing the game, I personally won from feeling like I did well. I'd play Medic and just heal, revive, and play the objective, even if my team lost, I was usually the top score of my team and sometimes even better than the winning team.
Then there's games where I get slaughtered but my team wins, that's a lose/win.
I think Ra's intent in saying to be free with your dark fantasies in mind is that it's better to leave some things to the imagination.
I find video games of killing others is a great outlet for my darkness. I feel bad ruining another players experience though which is why i now prefer zombie games where I kill AI instead of actual players.
(11-11-2017, 11:25 AM)MangusKhan Wrote: [ -> ] (11-11-2017, 10:58 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]Following up on the original post - it may be useful to remain mindful of which side of the Love/Winlose - Winlose/Love polarity we're playing out at any given time, as we go through our day. We all know, I think, how Love feels, and how irritating Winlose/Losewin feels. And if we realize that even Win carries Lose with it, the choice becomes even clearer.
But then catalyst comes up. People's actions will often pull us strongly towards Winlose/Losewin. Someone makes an antagonizing move and our ego leaps up to respond in kind, even if only with anger and resentment -- but even if we don't aggress, we're still in the conflict-ridden mind-space.
Egos are very sensitive to perceived aggression, and don't understand Love. Egos enjoy getting sucked into conflict and try to gain the upper hand. Which is also the lower hand, unfortunately (Win/Lose = Lose/Win) but egos don't get that. They're part of social animal consciousness, steeped in hierarchy, social status and survival needs. So if we want to be free, this is where Spirit needs to step in and gently redirect us back toward the path of harmony - even with those who would choose to attempt to suck us into their ego-games. Especially with them.
Hence, love thy enemies. Because then, as Laozi apparently realized, you will have no enemies.
Again more wisdom. I guess I'm just not ready to let go of this mode of being, which I feel to be so deeply a part of me. I find I simply cannot sit on the mountain and watch. Do wanderers not come here to affect change? How can you simply watch? Does no part of your being call you to fight or find elation in the battle? Do you not want to be a hero? Do you not want to look back on your life and laugh and laugh at the dynamic happenings?
These are questions which I often contemplate. Jesus fought, he did not sit under a tree drinking vinegar. He never harmed anyone (except that kid he petrified...), but he fought nonetheless. And what of Krishna? The epics describe him counselling Arjuna and urging him towards battle, lest the kingdom fall to wickedness and chaos. "Do thou fight for the sake of fighting". If you can stand up for something, then you should.
What does it mean to follow your deepest path, as Ra alludes to Jesus not doing by accepting martyrdom? I believe it means to become involved and affect change to the greatest extent that you can. If Jesus had accepted the Honour/Duty/Privilege of governing others, as Krishna had done, perhaps this whole world would now be a better place.
We are all here for different things. No harm wanting or needing adversarial contact. We all can help in different ways. My way is to always see the driving force of a persons patterns and distortions. This takes me out of the win/lose:lose/win streak Stranger described and I’m happiest out of that place.
If I Have to deal with conflict I approach it the same way. I see them deeply, I let them know I see their inner goodness, I show them my own, we find common ground and resolve things. I want us both to win so then I cannot set anyone up as an advisary. I cannot push anyone towards the direction of loss.
All things on the table I have crafted my associations carefully so I can live this way. Even in my business I only work for people I don’t sense a power struggle or animosity from and I nurture the relationship only as long as the dynamic remains. I’m over inducing stress on one another so if they require that they need to do these things with someone else.
Just commenting so you don’t feel criticism, in a way you are providing a service to others that need this win/lose structure.
(11-11-2017, 12:45 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]This discussion reminds me of why I enjoy Battlefield so much.
I played a close quarters level exclusively for a while. I found that sometimes in losing the game, I personally won from feeling like I did well. I'd play Medic and just heal, revive, and play the objective, even if my team lost, I was usually the top score of my team and sometimes even better than the winning team.
Then there's games where I get slaughtered but my team wins, that's a lose/win.
Thats really kind of cool.
(11-11-2017, 12:45 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]I think Ra's intent in saying to be free with your dark fantasies in mind is that it's better to leave some things to the imagination.
I think it has something to do with accepting self and not judging it. Things considered lower fall off naturally at the right time, so pushing to suppress or change things is really self judgement/nonacceptance and "better" to heal those parts than suppress and have it fester, though sometimes a huge festering wound brings more transformation than one that had been quickly healed. No one size fits all.
(11-11-2017, 11:58 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]Mangus, I can only speak for myself; we all need to find our own direction and answers. I want to be happy. I want life to feel effortless and joyful. I am weary of the struggle; it bores and annoys me.
I think this has been the case for many throughout history. The Buddha wanted to be done with it, and many other teachers. They are simply offering a way out of being stuck in the endless wash cycle, for those who want it. I know I want it. I'm sure it's not for everyone.
Of course I do recognize the grief around me, and want to do my part to alleviate it. I've found, however, that I am most effective at this - and at everything I attempt, actually - the more I am able to remain in the Love-space and out of the conflict-space. And today I've understood why - if Win/Lose = Lose/Win, choosing to remain in that game is simply busywork. Love is what heals, so that's the road I'm choosing to take, against the (very strenuous!) objections of the incomprehending ego, to which it feels like if I'm not winning, then I must be losing. But I know better.
The idea that I'm trying to fully understand and get across here is that love and win/lose may not be mutually exclusive. Love and light are in everything, and I see accepting the win/lose framework and working within it, holding steadfast to love, as being an ultimate goal. Such an entity would surely effect great positive timeline alteration. The Dàodéjīng is not just a book of abstract philosophy, but also a practical guide by which one who holds influence can govern with love and understanding. Including how to engage in warfare, when inevitable. So you're right, peace should be honoured whenever possible, and antagonising people unnecessarily is not The Way.
I have such a desire to take hold of this world and influence it though. I understand that this is a path I will be going down in some form or another, so collecting experience in dealing with interpersonal conflict, going so far as consciously creating it and then healing it, has been important to me lately. It's not that I want to be cruel, it's simply that knowledge is power, and the best is gleaned through experience, and the best time to get this kind of experience is when you are young and free and still have plenty of time to correct any unintended consequences, and no liabilities like dependent children or spouse. An active positive entity who really deeply understands conflict and power would have the greatest potential to affect change, understanding well the "enemy" and being able to work effectively with this knowledge in mind to bring about maximum peace and welfare.
I have asked L/L about this in email and they suggested I listen to their podcast #32:
http://llresearch.org/podcast/.
I personally believe that it is how you play "the game". In real battle, I am sure it is almost impossible to defend and attack with love in your heart for your opponent.
However, in online games I enjoy antagonizing only to the point my opponent can learn from their mistakes and best me. I yearn to learn more about the dynamics of the gameplay, and in choice-making. In this, we spar online, and if I lose, then I can learn from my mistakes, but foremost, I can acknowledge and thank my opponent for playing well and besting me. In this way, I believe it is positively polarizing, for I am hoping for a well deserved loss in hopes to learn more, rather than putting down my opponent.
I genuinely enjoy losing to a better opponent, and I thank them every time. I like to give kudos when someone tricks me or goes against my expectations to great effect.
I also enjoy playing to best others, but not nearly as much. If it is to the point I am savage and they are learning nothing but what defeat tastes like, I generally impose some handicaps on myself to keep it interesting for the both of us. I give pointers where applicable and wanted, too. Saying things like "nice try" and giving kudos where they succeed in small instances, even when they might lose, is very helpful for both individuals.
In this way, I like how in the podcast, a suggestion would be the way you play the game: one suggestion is to play so the teams are randomly chosen for every round. In this instance, it doesn't matter who wins, but rather who plays well in their team, and who has fun doing it.
I feel that this is the most fun way to play games. I enjoy online games that randomize the teams after every round. Some move the best performing player to the losing side after a round. I enjoy that.
My usual question for how to behave in any given context is so when I look back on this as a memory, I will be happy regardless who I experience the memory as.
(11-12-2017, 01:43 AM)Desynched Wrote: [ -> ]My usual question for how to behave in any given context is so when I look back on this as a memory, I will be happy regardless who I experience the memory as.
A brilliant new take on the Golden Rule. I love it and plan to use it. Thanks for sharing!
I think for most definitions of win and loss - for the commonly used societal definition - these concepts are simply (probably lower center) distortions as they presuppose the existence of some external conflict or contest, except when it's used to define outcomes in trivial games such as a game of tic-tac-toe or something that has no real impact on anything else and there is no stake in the outcome (ie, no real contest or conflict exists, it's just time-pass fun).
To put another way, when you feel a stinging loss, or a brilliant victory, there is often a deeper lesson at play rather than just reveling in the egoic pleasure or pain, and to focus on that you usually miss out on the bigger learning opportunities at play. Habitually thinking in terms of win/lose in most cases just stagnates one's level of analysis and understanding of the deeper concepts at play, in my experience (at least for the positive polarity). However, win/lose is a useful set of concepts to examine at least once though, as so much worth in our society is placed on these surface level concepts.
Quote:win
win/
verb
1.
be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict).
"the Mets have won four games in a row"
synonyms:
take, be the victor in, be the winner of, come first in, take first prize in, triumph in, be successful in More
2.
acquire or secure as a result of a contest, conflict, bet, or other endeavor.
"there are hundreds of prizes to be won"
synonyms:
secure, gain, garner, collect, pick up, walk away/off with, carry off; More
noun
1.
a successful result in a contest, conflict, bet, or other endeavor; a victory.
"a win against Norway"
synonyms:
victory, triumph, conquest
"a 1–0 win"
Quote:34.12 Questioner: I thought that that was correct, but I wasn’t sure. Can you give me the same type of information that we have been getting here with respect to the unmanifested self interacting between self and gadgets, toys, etc.— inventions?
Ra: I am Ra. In this particular instance we again concentrate for the most part in the orange and in the yellow energy centers. In a negative sense many of the gadgets among your peoples, that is what you call your communication devices and other distractions such as the less competitive games, may be seen to have the distortion of keeping the mind/body/spirit complex unactivated so that yellow- and orange-ray activity is much weakened thus carefully decreasing the possibility of eventual green-ray activation.
Others of your gadgets may be seen to be tools whereby the entity explores the capabilities of its physical or mental complexes and in some few cases, the spiritual complex, thus activating the orange ray in what you call your team sports and in other gadgets such as your modes of transport. These may be seen to be ways of investigating the feelings of power; more especially, power over others or a group power over another group of other-selves.
The concept of win/loss probably has greater import for the negative polarity - as certain lower ray distortions are embraced by negative philosophy- and as it seems that it can be used to established dominance and power over another-self in certain contexts.
(11-11-2017, 11:58 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ] (11-11-2017, 11:25 AM)MangusKhan Wrote: [ -> ]Again more wisdom. I guess I'm just not ready to let go of this mode of being, which I feel to be so deeply a part of me. I find I simply cannot sit on the mountain and watch. Do wanderers not come here to affect change? How can you simply watch? Does no part of your being call you to fight or find elation in the battle? Do you not want to be a hero? Do you not want to look back on your life and laugh and laugh at the dynamic happenings?
These are questions which I often contemplate.
Mangus, I can only speak for myself; we all need to find our own direction and answers. I want to be happy. I want life to feel effortless and joyful. I am weary of the struggle; it bores and annoys me.
I think this has been the case for many throughout history. The Buddha wanted to be done with it, and many other teachers. They are simply offering a way out of being stuck in the endless wash cycle, for those who want it. I know I want it. I'm sure it's not for everyone.
Of course I do recognize the grief around me, and want to do my part to alleviate it. I've found, however, that I am most effective at this - and at everything I attempt, actually - the more I am able to remain in the Love-space and out of the conflict-space. And today I've understood why - if Win/Lose = Lose/Win, choosing to remain in that game is simply busywork. Love is what heals, so that's the road I'm choosing to take, against the (very strenuous!) objections of the incomprehending ego, to which it feels like if I'm not winning, then I must be losing. But I know better.
I want to be effortless and bursting with joy as well. I want no impediment on the flow of my energy! Oh I will stand to the last Nexus, and summon as much Love into every moment. However on a very deep level, I am very weary of this plane. It is a beautiful majestic place, worthy of Love.
I am just tired. I don't know if it's being weary of this plane.
I remember when I was so weary in the past I asked Ra to please kill me and bring me back home.
Not realizing that probably isn't my density. And I don't know what I was asking.
After that I had the experience of seeing my distortions inside what seemed like the sun. Some spots hotter than others.
I find you always get what you need in this place.
Win/lose and Lose/win mechanics are both of negative nature.
In the positive format, it would be an entity freely giving the other.
In a higher format, it would be cooperating to create the result, then sharing the result equally in harmony and joy.
(07-18-2018, 08:35 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]In a higher format, it would be cooperating to create the result, then sharing the result equally in harmony and joy.
In 6D.