Bring4th

Ok, I need some clarification on this point Ra makes.
By "stronger" is Ra referring to fourth and higher dimensional work?

As I can tell, I've gotten my field pretty strong. I am very balance as well as I can tell. But not sure how "will" fits in with keeping energy centers balanced.

Is it possible my seeking and work might be decreasing my polarity?

Quote:52.7 Questioner: Am I correct, then, in assuming that discipline of the personality, knowledge of self, and control in strengthening of the will would be what any fifth-density entity would see as those things of importance?

Ra: I am Ra. In actuality these things are of importance in third through early seventh densities. The only correction in nuance that we would make is your use of the word, control. It is paramount that it be understood that it is not desirable or helpful to the growth of the understanding, may we say, of an entity by itself to control thought processes or impulses except where they may result in actions not consonant with the Law of One. Control may seem to be a short-cut to discipline, peace, and illumination. However, this very control potentiates and necessitates the further incarnative experience in order to balance this control or repression of that self which is perfect.

Instead, we appreciate and recommend the use of your second verb in regard to the use of the will. Acceptance of self, forgiveness of self, and the direction of the will; this is the path towards the disciplined personality. Your faculty of will is that which is powerful within you as co-Creator. You cannot ascribe to this faculty too much importance. Thus it must be carefully used and directed in service-to-others for those upon the positively oriented path.

There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity.

I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality. However, I see Ra's words as simply implying intent or motive, and this is of a higher nature.
PEACE

(01-18-2011, 09:09 PM)lightning Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality. However, I see Ra's words as simply implying intent or motive, and this is of a higher nature.
PEACE

then according to the above, people shouldnt become entrenched in positioning such as positive, or negative or sto or sts either.

By stronger Ra is referring to will power right now in 3D, a good example would be an ascetic who wants to become enlightened and read alot of STO material, but who doesn't know or care about what polarizing to STO truly means and who think that by denying themselves pleasures and building will power that alone will bring them to enlightenment. This I think always results in either someone being very depressed, rigid and self loathing and/or very controlling with other people. This quote has alot of significance to me because I used to fanatically follow a spiritual book that promoted basically what I described above. I agree with Ra, strong will power is great for someone very polarized, someone well on their way to adepthood who is very consciously aware of many unconscious processes like assumptions, habits, etc. but for most people it would be a harmful thing. I used to isolate myself from everyone but my girlfriend who I would always preach to about seemingly STO philosophy from that book, but in many ways my behaviour was more STS because I was very controlling with my self and others, very un-accepting of others and the world around me. I love Ra's message: just be yourself, that's all you need.

(01-18-2011, 10:18 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-18-2011, 09:09 PM)lightning Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality. However, I see Ra's words as simply implying intent or motive, and this is of a higher nature.
PEACE

then according to the above, people shouldnt become entrenched in positioning such as positive, or negative or sto or sts either.

Where do you draw that conclusion from? He's criticizing people for getting involved in petty disputes that seem STO but actually manifest someones STS side. That has nothing to do with the pure conscious pursuit of either path. By your logic starting a holy war with good intentions would be fine because you seem to be saying that being entrenched in anything is either inherently good or bad with no possible distinction between a worthy cause and an unworthy one. Yes those petty things can eventually lead to finding a more efficient path but will power should be correlated to polarization, if someone has strong will power when they're not well polarized you'll get people like Alex Jones.

Buddha sat by the river one day in a weakened state, for he had almost totally denied himself all luxuries and the most basic needs, including eating, for many months. He had hoped he might find enlightenment on this path, but it simply had not come to him.

As he sat there, a boat went by, and in the boat was a music teacher and student. They were having a conversation, and Buddha overheard the teacher speak the words "Too tight, and the strings will break; too loose, and the instrument will not play". Buddha then realized then that the middle path, the one of balance, would be the road to enlightenment, and resolved to follow this path.

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity.

I interpreted this quote to mean that we can subconsciously attempt to control others against their will, without realizing it. An example given by Ra is those 2 Wanderers who ended up switching to STS, because they tried to force spirituality on others. They ended up 'disconcerted.'

---

(01-18-2011, 09:09 PM)lightning Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality.

I'm confused by your statements. If we, as Wanderers, came here to lighten the vibrations, and we see injustices and get involved in causes to resolve those injustices, how is that "becoming entrenched...in personality-based drama" ?

By that logic, are you saying one shouldn't get involved in any causes, whether it be helping starving children, feeding the homeless, etc.? How does a Wanderer do work in the world, without getting involved in causes?

That's not to say that everyone must get involved in the same cause. Some feel drawn to certain causes, while others feel drawn to other causes. I don't understand how this could be viewed negatively.

I do agree about the "left vs right" because that is an overly simplistic "us vs them" attitude, generally, at least when it is applied to political ideologies. But the other examples you listed, I don't understand.

---

(01-18-2011, 10:18 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]then according to the above, people shouldnt become entrenched in positioning such as positive, or negative or sto or sts either.

Exactly. It could be said that we are 'becoming entrenched' in the 'cause' of the Law of One!

---

(01-18-2011, 11:11 PM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]Where do you draw that conclusion from? He's criticizing people for getting involved in petty disputes that seem STO but actually manifest someones STS side.

How is sincerely working for the causes of justice (in the case of atrocious crimes being committed) or championing victims of oppression, 'petty disputes'?

Those seem like genuinely STO actions to me.

(01-18-2011, 11:11 PM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]That has nothing to do with the pure conscious pursuit of either path.

Respectfully, I think it has everything to do with conscious pursuit of one's path. How can someone dedicated to the STO path ignore injustices and oppression?

(01-18-2011, 11:11 PM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]By your logic starting a holy war with good intentions would be fine because you seem to be saying that being entrenched in anything is either inherently good or bad with no possible distinction between a worthy cause and an unworthy one. Yes those petty things can eventually lead to finding a more efficient path but will power should be correlated to polarization, if someone has strong will power when they're not well polarized you'll get people like Alex Jones.

I think there has been some misinterpretation here, and it seems to hinge on the labeling of certain causes as 'petty.'

Is feeding starving children petty? Working to clean up the environment? Which causes are 'petty' and which are worthwhile?

NOT trying to be sarcastic or facetious...I am trying to understand what you're saying.

Thanks for bringing this up, Gemini. I'm actually not sure what Ra means by "personality", so I can't answer to what they mean by it being "stronger". Do they mean the surface personality, like the ego? Or do they mean the "magical personality"?

Besides, I would think if anything the use of the will would increase polarity. It seems like precisely the potentiation we're supposed to be effecting.

Thoughts?

(01-18-2011, 11:38 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-18-2011, 09:09 PM)lightning Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality.

I'm confused by your statements. If we, as Wanderers, came here to lighten the vibrations, and we see injustices and get involved in causes to resolve those injustices, how is that "becoming entrenched...in personality-based drama" ?

By that logic, are you saying one shouldn't get involved in any causes, whether it be helping starving children, feeding the homeless, etc.? How does a Wanderer do work in the world, without getting involved in causes?

That's not to say that everyone must get involved in the same cause. Some feel drawn to certain causes, while others feel drawn to other causes. I don't understand how this could be viewed negatively.

I do agree about the "left vs right" because that is an overly simplistic "us vs them" attitude, generally, at least when it is applied to political ideologies. But the other examples you listed, I don't understand.

How did you make the jump from conspiracy theories, politics, and new age beliefs about 2012 to helping starving children? I agreed with lightning on those particular examples and I on the underlying message which I interpreted as: seemingly STO causes which are actually neutral or STS; canon fodder for arguments that go nowhere. Of course wanting to help the homeless or starving children is a good cause and I don't think lightning would disagree with you so clearly there must be some misunderstanding.

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]How did you make the jump from conspiracy theories, politics, and new age beliefs about 2012 to helping starving children?

Those are all causes. Also the 'cause' of vegetarianism was mentioned in that list.

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]I agreed with lightning on those particular examples

That is precisely my point: Why are those particular causes singled out and labeled 'petty'?

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]and I on the underlying message which I interpreted as: seemingly STO causes which are actually neutral or STS; canon fodder for arguments that go nowhere.

Can you explain to me how those particular causes fit those descriptions?

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]Of course wanting to help the homeless or starving children is a good cause and I don't think lightning would disagree with you so clearly there must be some misunderstanding.

How is helping the homeless or starving children any more noble than wanting to see the perpetrators of an atrocious crime (911) brought to justice, or wanting to end the torture of billions of animals on a daily basis?

Why is a judgment being made about the causes that others feel passionate about?

(01-19-2011, 12:37 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]That is precisely my point: Why are those particular causes singled out and labeled 'petty'?

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]and I on the underlying message which I interpreted as: seemingly STO causes which are actually neutral or STS; canon fodder for arguments that go nowhere.

Can you explain to me how those particular causes fit those descriptions?

(01-19-2011, 12:25 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]Of course wanting to help the homeless or starving children is a good cause and I don't think lightning would disagree with you so clearly there must be some misunderstanding.

How is helping the homeless or starving children any more noble than wanting to see the perpetrators of an atrocious crime (911) brought to justice, or wanting to end the torture of billions of animals on a daily basis?

Why is a judgment being made about the causes that others feel passionate about?

Because people who care about homeless people or starving people are more likely to actually do something to help said people, where as people who care about 9/11 truth aren't likely to do anything but argue, tell people to "wake up", etc. And even if everyone in the world knew 9/11 was done by the Bush administration what would that accomplish? There'd still be the patriot act because there still are other terrorists out there than the one who supposedly conducted 9/11, there'd still be a war in afghanistan and iraq. And how is the message being spread now? A guy with a megaphone who believes in plenty of false things. Documentaries which, while providing facts, blame it on "the zionist conspiracy".

And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others, or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

Some causes are more distorted than others in terms of how much they help you polarize to STO. Knowing what you know now, would you rather use your will power for meditating, or for telling people about 9/11? For volunteering at an animal hospital or for fur is murder protests with red paint? Now, let's say you had the same degree of will power you have now as back when you were less "centered" on your path, do you think that would have done more harm or more good? In other words if will power was Watts and potential for polarization from a given cause was a percentage, then would it have been helpful or harmful for you to invest so much energy into lets say supporting a political party. I think we can all agree that left wing parties are usually more STO than right wing parties, even if both are almost always corrupt, so by your logic supporting a left wing party whole heartedly would be a good thing just because it seems good to the person, when in reality to that the person would have to be very controlling/unaccepting of many parts of themselves and of others, thereby not polarizing much either way but causing themselves alot of emotional anguish from the self discipline.

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, I need some clarification on this point Ra makes.
By "stronger" is Ra referring to fourth and higher dimensional work?

That's not indicated. Evidently, stronger means a stronger you as you are the you you know, you might say.

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]As I can tell, I've gotten my field pretty strong. I am very balance as well as I can tell. But not sure how "will" fits in with keeping energy centers balanced.

Is it possible my seeking and work might be decreasing my polarity?

I can tell you from my own experience that it can be very difficult to know how your will is operating unconsciously. We can be such sneaky creatures!

If you're able to do so objectively, it might be useful to observe how various people react towards you. Are they happy to see you? Are they a little wary around you? Such observations might give you hints.

Another tack: if you imagine that your soul was doing work while you are asleep, do you suppose it would be strengthening itself and doing other self-oriented activities, or might it be serving others in some capacity?

The good and the bad thing about will is that it enables you to do work. If some of your motivations are selfish, then that's where some of the energy is aimed.


Just curious: how did you determine that you are balanced?

Quote:How is helping the homeless or starving children any more noble than wanting to see the perpetrators of an atrocious crime (911) brought to justice, or wanting to end the torture of billions of animals on a daily basis?

Why is a judgment being made about the causes that others feel passionate about?

Quote:Because people who care about homeless people or starving people are more likely to actually do something to help said people, where as people who care about 9/11 truth aren't likely to do anything but argue, tell people to "wake up", etc. And even if everyone in the world knew 9/11 was done by the Bush administration what would that accomplish? There'd still be the patriot act because there still are other terrorists out there than the one who supposedly conducted 9/11, there'd still be a war in afghanistan and iraq. And how is the message being spread now? A guy with a megaphone who believes in plenty of false things. Documentaries which, while providing facts, blame it on "the zionist conspiracy".

And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others, or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

Some causes are more distorted than others in terms of how much they help you polarize to STO. Knowing what you know now, would you rather use your will power for meditating, or for telling people about 9/11? For volunteering at an animal hospital or for fur is murder protests with red paint? Now, let's say you had the same degree of will power you have now as back when you were less "centered" on your path, do you think that would have done more harm or more good? In other words if will power was Watts and potential for polarization from a given cause was a percentage, then would it have been helpful or harmful for you to invest so much energy into lets say supporting a political party. I think we can all agree that left wing parties are usually more STO than right wing parties, even if both are almost always corrupt, so by your logic supporting a left wing party whole heartedly would be a good thing just because it seems good to the person, when in reality to that the person would have to be very controlling/unaccepting of many parts of themselves and of others, thereby not polarizing much either way but causing themselves alot of emotional anguish from the self discipline.

In my opinion, there are different ways to be STO/STS and on occasions, they would depend on the historical circumstances and planet's conditions. Take for example this quote:

Quote:65.7 Questioner: How would conventional warfare offer the opportunities for seeking and service?

Ra: I am Ra. The possibility/probabilities exist for situations in which great portions of your continent and the globe in general might be involved in the type of warfare which you might liken to guerrilla warfare. The ideal of freedom from the so-called invading force of either the controlled fascism or the equally controlled social common ownership of all things would stimulate great quantities of contemplation upon the great polarization implicit in the contrast between freedom and control. In this scenario which is being considered at this time/space nexus the idea of obliterating valuable sites and personnel would not be considered an useful one. Other weapons would be used which do not destroy as your nuclear arms would. In this on-going struggle the light of freedom would burn within the mind/body/spirit complexes capable of such polarization. Lacking the opportunity for overt expression of the love of freedom, the seeking for inner knowledge would take root aided by those of the Brothers and Sisters of Sorrow which remember their calling upon this sphere.

The role of Wanderers may vary so much on a "personal" (soul group) level but the main "mission" is the same I guess: to increase Harvest (+) which will manifest on the next Octave as increasing the desire for a more positive Creation.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]Because people who care about homeless people or starving people are more likely to actually do something to help said people, where as people who care about 9/11 truth aren't likely to do anything but argue, tell people to "wake up", etc.

That is quite a blanket statement.

Sure, some people just bicker, but usually that's because, until recently, it was such a 'taboo' topic and anyone courageous enough to even dare to bring it up, was automatically labeled a wacko!

The likes of David Lee Griffin, Richard Gage, et al are true patriots...courageous souls who have put their careers and even lives on the line, in their work to expose the truth.

These and thousands of engineers, physicists, pilots, etc. have been getting results...they're not just bickering! They are running ads in New York City, sending research results to engineers across the country, and oh so much more!

This is no longer some 'fringe' people on the internet bickering, but a movement, which includes many of the families of the victims. Can the families of victims be blamed for pursuing justice?

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]And even if everyone in the world knew 9/11 was done by the Bush administration what would that accomplish?

That's like saying, "How could locking up one convicted murderer do any good, since there are still others out there?"

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]There'd still be the patriot act because there still are other terrorists out there than the one who supposedly conducted 9/11, there'd still be a war in afghanistan and iraq.

I think if people knew the truth about 911, it would rock their world, to the degree that they would start questioning that which they had taken for granted. Sort of like what Ra said happens when people encounter a UFO.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]And how is the message being spread now? A guy with a megaphone who believes in plenty of false things. Documentaries which, while providing facts, blame it on "the zionist conspiracy".

Ah, apparently you haven't been keeping up with the movement! I invite you to take a look at how the movement has evolved over the past few years.

Here are some reputable research sites. Check these out. You will be amazed!

http://ae911truth.org/

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

http://buildingwhat.org/

These are all action sites, based on research.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others,

So do you think those who fought to release 'slaves' were wrong too? Should they have just 'accepted' the 'slaveowners'?

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

If those championing the Blacks had just calmly voiced their opinion when asked, how much longer would it have taken to outlaw slavery in this country?

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]Some causes are more distorted than others in terms of how much they help you polarize to STO. Knowing what you know now, would you rather use your will power for meditating, or for telling people about 9/11?

Both have their place.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]For volunteering at an animal hospital or for fur is murder protests with red paint?

Both have their place. I am not personally bold enough to do some of the things other animal activists do, and I don't agree with all their actions. I certainly would never use any form of violence or vandalism. However, I am grateful to those who are bolder than me, because they have their place in the big picture. They are doing their part, and I am doing mine. We each have our own part to play. We don't have the same personalities, so some feel inclined to take more action, while others work inwardly. One way is not better than the other.

I disagree strongly with your implication that we should all just meditate. As long as we still reside in 3D, action has its place too.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]would it have been helpful or harmful for you to invest so much energy into lets say supporting a political party.

Supporting a political party is not something I would do, because I think both parties are bogus. Knowing what I know now, such action would be fruitless.

I don't think this is a very good example to make your point, because political parties are, by their very nature, divisive. That's not in the same category as being an activist to end animal torture, or help the families of 911 victims get resolution, or work to transform corruption in government into justice, etc. Those are all noble causes with tangible goals, whereas the very idea that a political party is somehow 'good' while the other is 'bad' is based on misinformation and deception.

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]I think we can all agree that left wing parties are usually more STO than right wing parties, even if both are almost always corrupt, so by your logic supporting a left wing party whole heartedly would be a good thing just because it seems good to the person, when in reality to that the person would have to be very controlling/unaccepting of many parts of themselves and of others, thereby not polarizing much either way but causing themselves alot of emotional anguish from the self discipline.

I don't think acceptance means we knowingly allow STS entities to harm others. Acceptance means we find the love in the present moment, so that the negativity is transformed, not that we look the other way and just allow the negativity to continue.

Perhaps this Q'uo session may be of help.

2009_0926

Quote:The first distortion is all-important when one is attempting to be of service to others. If entities have not asked for your service, then we would ask you, as one who wishes to serve, if there is an overriding reason why other entities’ sleep must be disturbed.

If there were only this lifetime and only this graduation, then perhaps we might agree that everyone should be shaken by the throat and told to wake up. However, there is all the time in the creation for entities to progress. While it is true that you now are at a time of graduation, a time of harvest, we would suggest that there shall be other harvests; there shall be other graduations. If a seeker needs to repeat third density, needs to repeat third grade, shall we say, in the school of souls, that is not a tragedy nor is it anything of which to be ashamed. Each entity shall progress. Each entity shall one day have accomplished every lesson, have satisfied every desire, and shall return to the one infinite Creator.

The principle of free will means that each entity gets to choose his rate of progress. When an entity such as yourself, who is so eager to progress and so diligent in seeking, comes across misunderstanding and misapprehended principles, it is a great temptation, or catalyst, shall we say, to set people right according to the way you think. And we do not say that the way you think is incorrect. We only say that the overriding principle here is free will.

We would suggest two things. Firstly, if an entity asks for your opinion, we encourage you to make maximal use of the opportunity to share the love and the light of the one Creator in ways that seem good to you.

Secondly, when entities are not asking you for your opinion or for your help, yet are engaging you in conversation, we would encourage you, as we often have before through this instrument, to be a Johnny Appleseed of spiritual thought. When you see an opening, toss some seeds of thought upon the ground of their attention. Perhaps they shall take root. Perhaps not. But you are doing your best for your brothers and sisters when you create opportunities to drop seeds.

(01-19-2011, 02:52 AM)Peregrinus Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps this Q'uo session may be of help.

That's a great quote and very helpful, Peregrinus! Although, it doesn't really address situations in which we might feel compelled to champion those who are victimized or oppressed, which is a different situation than just sharing spiritual knowledge to others who may or may not be asking us for it.

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]Is it possible my seeking and work might be decreasing my polarity?

Your question seems all the more poignant in the context of the conflicts above. Maybe others have ideas about how one can determine whether one is losing polarity by over use of will?

My "observe how others regard your presence" test is rather vague.

Hi Gemini

You discussed late last year how you felt that with greater spiritual mass it was necessary to take more care with stray thoughts otherwise they had the capacity to greatly influence the world around you. This is not so different from the necessity to safeguard the use of your will as your personality or will grows in strength. With greater awareness of your inner-light there is far greater momentum behind your thoughts or intent, and unless you take proportionately greater responsibility, you can cause harm where otherwise no harm was intended, or where no harm was encountered in the past under similar conditions.

An example of misplaced intent or will with unintended consequences is that of an Earth-bound spirit

Quote:Questioner: What stimulus would create what we call an Earth-bound spirit or a lingering ghost?

Ra: I am Ra. The stimulus for this is the faculty of the will. If the will of yellow-ray mind/body/spirit is that which is stronger than the progressive impetus of the physical death towards realization of that which comes, that is, if the will is concentrated enough upon the previous experience, the entity’s shell of yellow-ray, though no longer activated, cannot either be completely deactivated and, until the will is released, the mind/body/spirit complex is caught. This often occurs, as we see you are aware, in the case of sudden death as well as in the case of extreme concern for a thing or an other-self.

It's a physical feeling of my energy centers working together.

Since I posted, I actually found that my blue, throat chakra needs a little work.

It's possible that I'm not balanced, but when I tune in, I can nudge the centers till they feel fluid. Hard to put into words that would be adequate.

Thanks for asking.

(01-19-2011, 01:10 AM)peregrine Wrote: [ -> ]Just curious: how did you determine that you are balanced?

I think I agree with you for the most part Monica, I apologize for my temper. We should treat all endeavours by people equally, the only reason I was raising an exception was because of the will power idea Ra shared with us. But I think I was unclear in my self expression and in retrospect my thesis seems weaker than I considered it yesterday. I hope we're on good grounds Monica and unity.

(01-18-2011, 11:11 PM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-18-2011, 10:18 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-18-2011, 09:09 PM)lightning Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that there is danger if it is ego-based, which implies opinion, judgment, and what has been called positionality which in actuality is little more than judgment which comes from the personality. From this orientation, people become entrenched in such causes as vegetarianism, political "left vs right", 911 conspiracies, 2012 ascension and a multitude of other personality-based drama, often viewing it as spirituality. However, I see Ra's words as simply implying intent or motive, and this is of a higher nature.
PEACE

then according to the above, people shouldnt become entrenched in positioning such as positive, or negative or sto or sts either.

Where do you draw that conclusion from? He's criticizing people for getting involved in petty disputes that seem STO but actually manifest someones STS side. That has nothing to do with the pure conscious pursuit of either path.

where do i draw that conclusion from ?

what you may call as 'petty dispute' is important from the perspective of 2d consciousness. its petty for you, but not petty for anyone concentrating on that ray, or anyone in 2d.

moreover, polarity, is a positionality. arguing otherwise defies the definition of polarity, meaning the entities get placed in certain points of the spectrum according to each other, in perspective an behavior and energy. if they dont positionalize themselves steadfastly, they cannot polarize.

Quote:By your logic starting a holy war with good intentions would be fine because you seem to be saying that being entrenched in anything is either inherently good or bad with no possible distinction between a worthy cause and an unworthy one. Yes those petty things can eventually lead to finding a more efficient path but will power should be correlated to polarization, if someone has strong will power when they're not well polarized you'll get people like Alex Jones.

there is nothing relevant in between what i said, and what you say in the above block. therefore, i cant even begin to reply.

---

(01-18-2011, 11:38 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity.

I interpreted this quote to mean that we can subconsciously attempt to control others against their will, without realizing it. An example given by Ra is those 2 Wanderers who ended up switching to STS, because they tried to force spirituality on others. They ended up 'disconcerted.'

---

it precisely seems to be intended for that meaning. but, i think its more relevant to the unintended influencing of others, even in things that have no relevance to spirituality. it has rather magical meaning.

(01-19-2011, 10:28 PM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]I think I agree with you for the most part Monica, I apologize for my temper. We should treat all endeavours by people equally, the only reason I was raising an exception was because of the will power idea Ra shared with us. But I think I was unclear in my self expression and in retrospect my thesis seems weaker than I considered it yesterday. I hope we're on good grounds Monica and unity.

Sure, we're cool. Thanks!

(01-19-2011, 01:58 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others,

So do you think those who fought to release 'slaves' were wrong too? Should they have just 'accepted' the 'slaveowners'?

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

If those championing the Blacks had just calmly voiced their opinion when asked, how much longer would it have taken to outlaw slavery in this country?

Someone could read this and say that you're comparing Blacks to chickens and cows.

I could say that to make you look inhumane or whatever, using willpower in the attempt to advance my argument (which I could believe to be a noble STO cause) and weaken your credibility, polarizing me a bit towards STS.

I think that's an example of the great danger in use of the will, lol.

I'm using my will right now to prove a point - is my purpose to give a viewpoint, or to inflate my ego by looking smart? Am I polarizing STS right now?



L/L Monica, I'm not saying you think the rights of cows and chickens are as important as civil rights, I just used a dirty political tactic to make a point. I think you're awesome.

(01-22-2011, 03:41 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-19-2011, 01:58 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others,

So do you think those who fought to release 'slaves' were wrong too? Should they have just 'accepted' the 'slaveowners'?

(01-19-2011, 01:06 AM)turtledude23 Wrote: [ -> ]or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

If those championing the Blacks had just calmly voiced their opinion when asked, how much longer would it have taken to outlaw slavery in this country?

Someone could read this and say that you're comparing Blacks to chickens and cows.

I could say that to make you look inhumane or whatever, using willpower in the attempt to advance my argument (which I could believe to be a noble STO cause) and weaken your credibility, polarizing me a bit towards STS.

I think that's an example of the great danger in use of the will, lol.

I'm using my will right now to prove a point - is my purpose to give a viewpoint, or to inflate my ego by looking smart? Am I polarizing STS right now?



L/L Monica, I'm not saying you think the rights of cows and chickens are as important as civil rights, I just used a dirty political tactic to make a point. I think you're awesome.

Yes! Thank you Wander-Man, that's the point I was trying to get at.

(01-22-2011, 03:41 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]Someone could read this and say that you're comparing Blacks to chickens and cows.

They already did, on the meat thread. And I replied, explaining that no, I wasn't comparing humans to chickens, except for their common ability to feel pain and fight for survival. (Although, I don't understand why not? What is wrong with comparing our younger, 2D brethren? They are entities too!)

But in this case, I was actually comparing the cause of championing victims; whether the victim is human or animal is irrelevant to my point.

The cause could even be to champion the environment. Whatever the cause, how much longer would it have taken to get anything done, had it not been for those courageous enough to speak out and take action?

My point was that, those quietly praying/meditating, and those boldly taking action, both have their place.

(01-22-2011, 03:41 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]I could say that to make you look inhumane or whatever, using willpower in the attempt to advance my argument (which I could believe to be a noble STO cause) and weaken your credibility, polarizing me a bit towards STS.

I don't understand. How would comparing the suffering of 2D entities to 3D entities make someone look inhumane? (Or am I misunderstanding you?)

(01-22-2011, 03:41 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]I'm using my will right now to prove a point - is my purpose to give a viewpoint, or to inflate my ego by looking smart? Am I polarizing STS right now?

If you are implying something, it has eluded me.

(01-22-2011, 03:41 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]L/L Monica, I'm not saying you think the rights of cows and chickens are as important as civil rights, I just used a dirty political tactic to make a point. I think you're awesome.

Well thank you, Wander-Man, and I hope my next statement doesn't cause you to retract yours but actually, I do think the cause of ending animal suffering is just as important as the causes of human rights. Suffering is suffering, and all suffering is contributing to the low vibrations on this planet.

Does this mean I think animals are as important as humans? To the Creator, probably. But I am human and I have biases. I consider humans more important than animals. I readily admit I would save the child before the dog. Yes, we do have hierarchies when it comes to species. I consider 3D more important than 2D, because they are more invested in this incarnation. But that doesn't make the cause of championing oppressed animals, any less important or less noble than the cause of championing oppressed humans. I absolutely believe that, someday, the meat industry will be viewed in the same way that slavery is viewed now.

His accusation wasn`t meant to be logically solid but was rather meant to be an example of someone using their will power to taint someone else`s image while believing themselves to be acting in STO.

yeah really, why are the chickens, cows less valuable, even expendable ? werent you all 2d entities back at some point in the history of this universe ?

(01-22-2011, 08:01 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]Does this mean I think animals are as important as humans? To the Creator, probably. But I am human and I have biases. I consider humans more important than animals. I readily admit I would save the child before the dog. Yes, we do have hierarchies when it comes to species. I consider 3D more important than 2D, because they are more invested in this incarnation.

To clarify:

I would surmise that ALL life is equally important to the Creator. Humans, however, have biases. We all talk about love here on this forum, but in reality, all of us value our own families and friends more than strangers. How much more so do most people value other humans, any humans, more than animals?

To me, it isn't so much about value as it is pragmatism. I know that 3D entities are more invested in their incarnation, because they are at a point in their evolution where they may be consciously programming their lifetime's curriculum. Whereas, 2D entities are still pretty much automatic.

Thus, a cat would likely reincarnate more quickly than a human. I've seen this happen; I've seen cats reincarnate within just a few months.

So, even species biases aside, it's pragmatic to be aware that a human has more invested in this lifetime, when faced with the hypothetical "would you save the dog or human first" situation.

Until recently, it was considered acceptable to value those of one's own race to be more valuable than those of other races. There are still those who think that way. Same goes with country of origin.

Biases regarding species and sub-categories abound and are considered acceptable. So much so, that I detected indignation at the possibility that I might actually consider animals to be as important as humans!

Why is that such an offensive thought?

It so happens, that I admit to my biases in favor of humans. But what if I did consider humans and animals equal? What then?

I don't even think I'm right in having my bias. Justified perhaps, but right? I really don't know. Does the Creator have a bias in favor of humans? Does the Logos?

I know some people whose dogs and cats are their only family. Are they wrong for valuing their dogs and cats more than other humans who are not family?

What about other 3D entities that are considered 'animals' by humans, such as dolphins? How many of us would fight just as hard to save a dolphin, as we would to save a human?

And if not, then why not?

I don't know the answers to these questions. I am just asking them, to stimulate thought. Why do we now frown upon racism, but speciesism is still considered acceptable?

Why aren't there cow and chicken wanderers?

(01-23-2011, 01:30 PM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ]Why aren't there cow and chicken wanderers?

Wanderers are 4D+. Transplants are 3D and possibly 2D. 3D incarnation is automatic until about the 4th subdensity.

(01-18-2011, 08:58 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, I need some clarification on this point Ra makes.
By "stronger" is Ra referring to fourth and higher dimensional work?

As I can tell, I've gotten my field pretty strong. I am very balance as well as I can tell. But not sure how "will" fits in with keeping energy centers balanced.

Is it possible my seeking and work might be decreasing my polarity?

Quote:52.7 Questioner: Am I correct, then, in assuming that discipline of the personality, knowledge of self, and control in strengthening of the will would be what any fifth-density entity would see as those things of importance?

Ra: I am Ra. In actuality these things are of importance in third through early seventh densities. The only correction in nuance that we would make is your use of the word, control. It is paramount that it be understood that it is not desirable or helpful to the growth of the understanding, may we say, of an entity by itself to control thought processes or impulses except where they may result in actions not consonant with the Law of One. Control may seem to be a short-cut to discipline, peace, and illumination. However, this very control potentiates and necessitates the further incarnative experience in order to balance this control or repression of that self which is perfect.

Instead, we appreciate and recommend the use of your second verb in regard to the use of the will. Acceptance of self, forgiveness of self, and the direction of the will; this is the path towards the disciplined personality. Your faculty of will is that which is powerful within you as co-Creator. You cannot ascribe to this faculty too much importance. Thus it must be carefully used and directed in service-to-others for those upon the positively oriented path.

There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity.

Gemini Wolf,

I haven't read this thread beyond your initial post but would like to respond to your interest in exploring the bolded section of the quoted Law of One passage.

I didn't quite understand this quote from Ra until I encountered the following excerpt from the book "Wake Up to Your Life: Discovering the Buddhist Path of Attention" by Ken McLeod.

Quote:Page 88, Ken McLeod:

Finally, there is one pitfall in meditation practice that you must avoid. Meditation practice raises the level of energy in your system in the form of active attention. The higher level of energy inevitably brings you into contact with reactive emotional patterns. If you now become selective and repress emotions, pushing them out of attention, two things happen.

The higher level of energy in your system flows into the reactive pattern, making that stronger. Both the reactive patterns of the emotion and the repression are reinforced. You end up splitting in two. One part of you is capable of attention and response. The other part becomes increasingly rigid and inflexible. It takes over unpredictably whenever the repressed emotion is triggered by events or situation. Typically, a person becomes more arrogant, self-indulgent, obsessed with power, money, sex, security, or other fixations, and acts in ways to control or amass the object of obsession.

Long-term practitioners and teachers who protect areas of their lives from their practice frequently run into this problem with unfortunate and sometimes tragic results. We run the risk of a similar fate if we protect any area of our personality or lives from the increased awareness that develops in meditation.

To guard against this problem, always have at least one person, a teacher, colleague, or friend, with whom you discuss all aspects of your practice and your life. The person needs to be someone you trust and to whom you will listen regardless of the state of mind you are in or what he or she says. The only way to be sure that you will not protect an area of your habituated personality from the effects of practice is to have such a person in your life.

My basic interpretation of this follows.

Our will is a tool, a "faculty", and it can be employed by any desire within us, from red ray on up.

Say for instance you have a desire for fame, for being defensive, for dominating another, for being dominated by another, for money, for pleasure, for glory, for aversion from that which is uncomfortable, etc.

These unrecognized, unintegrated, unconscious desires literally *live* within you. They continue to desire & continue to operate. They are in motion. They are self-sustaining. And As more energy becomes available for the separate system that is your personality shell, these desires (outside of your conscious purview) may co-opt your consciousness, so to speak, by grabbing hold of the power of the will in order to achieve the object of their desires.

In the process of co-opting your will and using it towards the end of the particular desire or complex of desires, *you* will be carried away on a mission to achieve the desired end. Likely that desired end will not be about serving others with love and transparency but will rather serve to DEpolarize you by moving your overall vibration in un-polarized or negatively polarized directions.

Thusly it is well, as Ken McLeod says in the quoted section above, to open up every aspect of your life to the light of your consciousness and presence. These desires operate outside of your awareness and can be successful in hijacking your faculty of will only in your absence.

With love and light,
Gary