Bring4th

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Over the years, I have seen a certain kind of practice grow among many "lightworker communities" which has never "resonated" with me.

It is the idea of consciously directing love energy to other people that have not specifically requested it.

Love is intelligent energy. It already knows where it is needed.

In contrast to sending love to the Logos, or the planetary entity, to a particular "region" experiencing some kind of calamity, or simply radiating love outwards in all directions unconditionally, the notion of sending love to one who has not directly asked for it- to my intuition and understanding- is fundamentally manipulative and infringes upon free will.

In more recent times, I have seen not only an uptick in this type of behavior, but a development which- to my inner wisdom- gives me cause for concern of a much greater magnitude.

It is the notion of consciously directing love energy at other entities which have been judged to be "negative."

To me, this represents a form of spiritual warfare. To my own intuitive awareness, this appears to me as dropping "green bombs" on others out of a distorted belief that we "positives" somehow know what is best for others- in particular those we have judged to be "negative."

Therefore, because of the act of judgement implied in the "green bombing" the result is to actually strengthen the karmic ties between those bombers, and those bombed. This may not be immediately apparent to those being recruited into spiritual war, and whose naivete with green-ray group activity leaves them vulnerable to manipulation by those seeking to exercise control and domination of others.

Furthermore- any argument of whether or not this actually constitutes warfare aside- the entire idea is based upon a distortion of self/other which is not in any case necessary.

We are given several methods of "sending love energy" that do not involve any potential for free-will violation.

1. Sending love to the inner self.
2. Sending love to those within one's immediate personal circle, for which specific channels have been opened and agreed upon. Including pets.
3. Sending love to the Logos.
4. Sending love to the planetary entity.
5. Radiating love outwards in all directions without condition.

In consideration of this plethora of options for expressing our true loving natures without concern for possible free will infringement and further imbalance, I would invite the reader to ponder deeply upon the wisdom of consciously directing love energy to any specific entity which has not specifically requested it.

Again- Love is intelligent energy. To seek to limit, control, or impose our own distortions and conditions upon Love is folly of a most grievous sort.

Surely- each of us has had ample opportunity to teach/learn this by now?

I would furthermore ask each of you- as my spiritual brothers and sisters- to take this notion of the possibility of "spiritual warfare" by dropping "green bombs" on (perceived) negative entities- and to enter into meditation with it. Please take this idea under profound consideration, not only by the green ray, but also by the blue and indigo rays.

Please- do not accept my own inner guidance for your own, or interpret my posting this as an attempted demonstration of "spiritual authority."

This post is motivated by love and compassion. For myself, for you, and for the planet. Please accept it as such.

In Peace,

TN

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Over the years, I have seen a certain kind of practice grow among many "lightworker communities" which has never "resonated" with me.

It is the idea of consciously directing love energy to other people that have not specifically requested it.

Love is intelligent energy. It already knows where it is needed.

In contrast to sending love to the Logos, or the planetary entity,to a particular "region" experiencing some kind of calamity, or simply radiating love outwards in all directions unconditionally, the notion of sending love to one who has not directly asked for it- to my intuition and understanding- is fundamentally manipulative and infringes upon free will.

In more recent times, I have seen not only an uptick in this type of behavior, but a development which- to my inner wisdom- gives me cause for concern of a much greater magnitude.

It is the notion of consciously directing love energy at other entities which have been judged to be "negative."

To me, this represents a form of spiritual warfare. To my own intuitive awareness, this appears to me as dropping "green bombs" on others out of a distorted belief that we "positives" somehow know what is best for others- in particular those we have judged to be "negative."

Furthermore- any argument of whether or not this actually constitutes warfare aside- the entire idea is based upon a distortion of self/other which is not in any case necessary.

We are given several methods of "sending love energy" that do not involve any potential for free-will violation.

1. Sending love to the inner self.
2. Sending love to those within one's immediate personal circle, for which specific channels have been opened and agreed upon.
3. Sending love to the Logos.
4. Sending love to the planetary entity.
5. Radiating love outwards in all directions without condition.

In consideration of this plethora of options for expressing our true loving natures without concern for possible free will infringement and further imbalance, I would invite the reader to ponder deeply upon the wisdom of consciously directing love energy to any specific entity which has not specifically requested it.

I would furthermore ask each of you- as my spiritual brothers and sisters- to take this notion of the possibility of "spiritual warfare" by dropping "green bombs" on (perceived) negative entities- and to enter into meditation with it. Please take this idea under consideration, not only by the green ray, but also by the blue and indigo rays.

Please- do not accept my own inner guidance for your own, or interpret my posting this as an attempted demonstration of "spiritual authority."

This post is motivated by love and compassion. For myself, for you, and for the planet. Please accept it as such.

Wrote a book complaining about this over the years. This and all other forms of spiritual warfare and how easy it is to be mired into that world and the proper steps to take in succesive order once you become aware of the problem of what the "evil" (going to war for good) actually is. and how to still do good despite going to war for good. Good stuff it was, helped me along quite a bit.

Guess i better stop shipping gifts to those i feel could use some help. They did not ask and i guess i was infringing.

As one of the people who participated in this practice you are speaking out against I can see where you are coming from, but I disagree. I don't see myself wielding love as a weapon, I see myself radiating acceptance and gratitude to those who have provided me with the essential catalyst necessary for my own personal growth. I have no attachment to how these energies are received, but if you are going to tell me that gratitude isn't a proper attitude to cultivate I'm just gonna flat out say that I cannot get behind that.

Perhaps it depends on how it is structured.

Maybe if you were focusing on the thought of forgiveness and acceptance and empowered that with your feelings of love it would not infringe on free will? Since the love would not be directly "sent" to those beings.

I believe that's what most people intuitively intend when they are sending love. But I don't really do that so this is from an intellectual stand-point.

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Over the years, I have seen a certain kind of practice grow among many "lightworker communities" which has never "resonated" with me.

It is the idea of consciously directing love energy to other people that have not specifically requested it.

Love is intelligent energy. It already knows where it is needed.

If love is intelligent energy, does one 'control' love by focusing it somewhere? Can anyone really 'control love? If you offer someone something, do they not have the free will to reject it?

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]In contrast to sending love to the Logos, or the planetary entity, to a particular "region" experiencing some kind of calamity, or simply radiating love outwards in all directions unconditionally, the notion of sending love to one who has not directly asked for it- to my intuition and understanding- is fundamentally manipulative and infringes upon free will.

Can something be requested if it is not offered at first? That is to say, can love be requested if a particular entity is highly unfamiliar or unsure of a particular type of energy? Is harm, or free will being infringed upon by an offer, or is this a opening of free will in which more choice is given to the entity to discern, to reject/accept to their own will?

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]In more recent times, I have seen not only an uptick in this type of behavior, but a development which- to my inner wisdom- gives me cause for concern of a much greater magnitude.

It is the notion of consciously directing love energy at other entities which have been judged to be "negative."

To me, this represents a form of spiritual warfare. To my own intuitive awareness, this appears to me as dropping "green bombs" on others out of a distorted belief that we "positives" somehow know what is best for others- in particular those we have judged to be "negative."

Therefore, because of the act of judgement implied in the "green bombing" the result is to actually strengthen the karmic ties between those bombers, and those bombed. This may not be immediately apparent to those being recruited into spiritual war, and whose naivete with green-ray group activity leaves them vulnerable to manipulation by those seeking to exercise control and domination of others.

Furthermore- any argument of whether or not this actually constitutes warfare aside- the entire idea is based upon a distortion of self/other which is not in any case necessary.

If this distortion of self/other is not necessary, then it negates your entire reasoning behind why this practice should be stopped. If this distortion is no longer useful as a catalyst, then what is the difference between their behavior and your own, is it simply not a reflection? The Janus-faced process of being? What is the purpose of sending love outwards if there is no distinction- shouldn't we simply rest in 'being' then?

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]We are given several methods of "sending love energy" that do not involve any potential for free-will violation.

1. Sending love to the inner self.
2. Sending love to those within one's immediate personal circle, for which specific channels have been opened and agreed upon. Including pets.
3. Sending love to the Logos.
4. Sending love to the planetary entity.
5. Radiating love outwards in all directions without condition.

In consideration of this plethora of options for expressing our true loving natures without concern for possible free will infringement and further imbalance, I would invite the reader to ponder deeply upon the wisdom of consciously directing love energy to any specific entity which has not specifically requested it.

Again- Love is intelligent energy. To seek to limit, control, or impose our own distortions and conditions upon Love is folly of a most grievous sort.

Surely- each of us has had ample opportunity to teach/learn this by now?

Love here is still vague. If it is intelligent, can we ever control it in any sense? Or is it a phenomena that 'takes a hold' of us and affects us as beings? Is love something that we must 'open up to'? If we channel love with distortion (as many beings do above 3D), then is this not acceptable to distort/channel our love in the distortion of service?

(12-07-2012, 04:34 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]I would furthermore ask each of you- as my spiritual brothers and sisters- to take this notion of the possibility of "spiritual warfare" by dropping "green bombs" on (perceived) negative entities- and to enter into meditation with it. Please take this idea under profound consideration, not only by the green ray, but also by the blue and indigo rays.

Please- do not accept my own inner guidance for your own, or interpret my posting this as an attempted demonstration of "spiritual authority."

This post is motivated by love and compassion. For myself, for you, and for the planet. Please accept it as such.

In Peace,

TN

Although I do not practice channeling my love in any specific entity or direction, I believe what you are arguing logically does not make sense. This does not mean that you do not have a point, or what you are saying is not worthwhile. It simply is a bit vague and your logic becomes a bit 'muddled' when dealing with ontological concepts beyond other/self and the metaphysical nature of love.

(12-07-2012, 06:14 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]Guess i better stop shipping gifts to those i feel could use some help. They did not ask and i guess i was infringing.

Thanks for that, Genghis.

(12-07-2012, 09:24 PM)SomaticDreams Wrote: [ -> ]If love is intelligent energy, does one 'control' love by focusing it somewhere? Can anyone really 'control love? If you offer someone something, do they not have the free will to reject it?

It isn't about controlling the love, it is about whether or not there is an intention to control the recipient to create a specific outcome. There may or may not be such an intention with the sending of love. For beings of the same polarity, there is probably little negative effect, even if rejected. For beings of opposite polarity, the interactions are somewhat different.

Quote:Can something be requested if it is not offered at first? That is to say, can love be requested if a particular entity is highly unfamiliar or unsure of a particular type of energy? Is harm, or free will being infringed upon by an offer, or is this a opening of free will in which more choice is given to the entity to discern, to reject/accept to their own will?

Who among us has not been offered love? Love does not cause harm. Distorted thoughtforms about love do. People try to "control" each other with love all the time. It's rather commonplace behavior.

Quote:If this distortion of self/other is not necessary, then it negates your entire reasoning behind why this practice should be stopped. If this distortion is no longer useful as a catalyst, then what is the difference between their behavior and your own, is it simply not a reflection? The Janus-faced process of being? What is the purpose of sending love outwards if there is no distinction- shouldn't we simply rest in 'being' then?

I don't believe that I said it should be stopped. I was simply drawing attention to what I perceive it to be. And pointing out other options.

Quote:If we channel love with distortion (as many beings do above 3D), then is this not acceptable to distort/channel our love in the distortion of service?

When we seek to control others with love, problems ensue. Really... is this news to anybody here? I don't think this is a new idea to anybody.

Quote:It simply is a bit vague and your logic becomes a bit 'muddled' when dealing with ontological concepts beyond other/self and the metaphysical nature of love.

Maybe you are looking for a deeper point than there really is. Or perhaps you just misread the post. It is about the wisdom of trying to control others with love- not the wisdom of trying to control love.

What I am talking about here is the potential unforeseen consequences of groups consciously sending love energy to negative entities. Such groups are free to do as they will. And no doubt they will.

Then there are those who might decide to try out some of the other options.

Tenet, I can appreciate your concerns, but didn't really have anything to add, because Lynn's original post was sheer perfection.

But I just thought of something that might help clarify:

I agree that sending 'love bombs' to STS entities for the purpose of changing them is spiritual warfare and is the same as them sending hate/fear bombs to STOs.

However, that isn't what we're doing.

We are actually doing the opposite of engaging in spiritual warfare. The whole point of the meditation is to stop the spiritual warfare!

How? With love, acceptance and forgiveness.

The whole planet has been trapped in a stranglehold of karmic ties with these entities for milennia, and now it's time for those ties to become unraveled. The people are crying for release. Do you hear them? I hear them. I hear their pleas for help. So many 3D entities are waking up to the realization that they've been lied to, drugged, and taken advantage of by the power elite.

They are fighting back, but they are still locked into 'fight' mode so their way of fighting is to stockpile weapons and hunker down for the zombie apocalypse.

They don't understand what is happening. They still think in terms of good and evil...and that's it's ok for good to fight evil because good is nicer.

These people are such dear souls. I know some of them and so do you. They are doing what they can to make ends meet. They do volunteer work and sincerely care about helping others....They have children and want to leave the world a better place...Their hearts are just beginning to flower and it's a lovely sight to behold.

They are harvestable, many of them.

They are calling. I hear their call. Do you?

They need some help. We have the ability to help them. We can intercede. We can reach out in love, acceptance and forgiveness to those entities who have kept these younger souls hostage. Not to change them. We have no expectation of outcome; thus, it isn't controlling.

We have awakened. Think of it as asking the negative elite to pass the torch to the Lightbearers of the New Age.

The negative elite were the leaders (darkness bearers?) of the ending age. Their time is up. We aren't trying to control them. We simply recognize that they are leaving and we're saying good-bye, while allowing them to pass the torch to us.

"We" being the awakened Wanderers AND the newly harvestable 3D entities...anyone who is consciously working to usher in a brighter reality on this planet.

The STS entities controlled. But we won't, because that is not in our nature. We will illuminate.

They obscured the light; we will radiate it.

They polluted the planet; we will honor her.

They served their purpose. Their work is done. And so we honor them and thank them...while, at the same time, letting them know that we are ready to do our jobs, so they can retire.

To continue to think in terms of 'spiritual warfare' is to continue the illusion of separation.

Our meditation is going beyond the illusion into Oneness.

It is on this level that the tangled knots can be untangled. On this level, the STS entities understand because they too serve the Creator.

(12-08-2012, 03:51 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]It isn't about controlling the love, it is about whether or not there is an intention to control the recipient to create a specific outcome. There may or may not be such an intention with the sending of love. For beings of the same polarity, there is probably little negative effect, even if rejected. For beings of opposite polarity, the interactions are somewhat different.

If we are to have an 'intention to control the recipient to create a specific outcome, then do we not have to control the manner in which we channel the love? If distorted thought forms filter our love in the form of service, is that not how love is 'channeled' or 'controlled' in your mind? Or does this occur some other way?

(12-08-2012, 03:51 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Who among us has not been offered love? Love does not cause harm. Distorted thought forms about love do. People try to "control" each other with love all the time. It's rather commonplace behavior.

Hence why I said entities who are highly unfamiliar or uncomfortable with energy. Being offered something once does not give much choice if rejected. Offering open love constantly gives more chances for a possible recipient. I never claimed it wasn't common place, the questions are a way of probing how you conceptualize these concepts.

(12-08-2012, 03:51 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]I don't believe that I said it should be stopped. I was simply drawing attention to what I perceive it to be. And pointing out other options.

When we seek to control others with love, problems ensue. Really... is this news to anybody here? I don't think this is a new idea to anybody.

I believe you are trying to appear as if you have no vested interest in stopping this practice- although you have repeatedly made your points and said this practice was disturbing. Pointing out other options is fine, but it indicates that you are pointing to these alternative practices as preferable because they make sense to you. What I am trying to point out is that they do not make logical sense, depending on how you define such terms of love, free will, and the transmission of energy.

(12-08-2012, 03:51 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe you are looking for a deeper point than there really is. Or perhaps you just misread the post. It is about the wisdom of trying to control others with love- not the wisdom of trying to control love.

What I am talking about here is the potential unforeseen consequences of groups consciously sending love energy to negative entities. Such groups are free to do as they will. And no doubt they will.

Then there are those who might decide to try out some of the other options.

I'm not 'looking for a deeper point', but trying to understand how you conceptualize the concepts. It's clear that the disagreement stems from our preconceived and tacit understandings of such concepts such as love, transmission of energy and free will. This is not necessarily deeper, just illuminating the foundations of your thought-process. If we continue to use such terms, people end up simply saying "We agree to disagree" because they do not want to take the time or energy to probe the structures of their thought. The symbolic universe we live in changes once these deepest notions and preconceptions are opened up- e.g. the reading of the Ra material offers a monistic/pantheistic viewpoint that many westerners are not used to. The implications of changing the fundamental ontology of a person's symbolic universe is vast. This is why I'm curious to your specific definitions of these concepts. Otherwise, we will simply get no where because the misunderstandings will continue without making them explicit.

"It is about the wisdom of trying to control others with love- not the wisdom of trying to control love." Specifically, my post was a way of showing you that what you are implying is that in order to try and control others with love, an entity must have a way of controlling love itself, channeling the various ways it is able to be manifested. This implies that love is a universal energy field that is channeled through an entity and manifested in particular behavior actions or thought-forms. Is this possible?- or is it that love is 'created' or 'found within' a being and that being has to eliminate all of it's distortions in able to express that love? Is it that being's responsibility? etc etc

From the ontology arises an ethical system. Out of this we may more clearly understand your position. That's all I'm looking for, is clarity. You say these concepts but it's quite clear everyone has their own notions. I'm simply interested in yours. I don't even particularly disagree with most of what you say, it's just that how your explaining it now is muddled with preconceptions/tacit understandings that are not made clear.

(12-08-2012, 04:43 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]I agree that sending 'love bombs' to STS entities for the purpose of changing them is spiritual warfare and is the same as them sending hate/fear bombs to STOs.

Great, then we have little more to discuss here!

Quote:However, that isn't what we're doing.

Awesome! Understand- this post may have been inspired by what was going on in other threads... but it isn't "directed" at them. What I had to say in the other threads... I did. This thread is more generalized. As you can see in the introduction, I am talking about what I have seen in many "lightworker communities" so there is a much broader context. I'm not just writing about B4th.

After contemplating what my own reaction was about... I came up with something. Which is posted here. Really not sure what there was a hullabaloo about.

What will be really great is when the time comes that an individual can express their opinion without anybody else taking offense, or feeling attacked by it. But then again, I'm sure humanity will get that all ironed out by the end of 4D.

Quote:To continue to think in terms of 'spiritual warfare' is to continue the illusion of separation.

Well yes, exactly. As we have previously discussed, the "battle" continues on into 4D. It just changes form and is no longer violent. Which is a great thing... but it doesn't make it any more necessary.

We each have our roles to play. Mine is about balancing the distortions which drive us to seek battle- physical or not.

I believe I do understand where Tenet Nosce is coming from (I've also witnessed the "let's bombard the world with love!" attitude of many/most New Age groups nowadays).

May I toss a few cents?

First of all, the entire Creation is of Love. Each density/energy nexus represents and recapitulates a certain quality of the Universal Love of the One Infinite Creator. Green-ray is compassion/love, not blue-ray wisdom/love nor indigo-ray unity/love. Yet all is Love—or degrees of that One Love. This is important to keep in mind, for the "heart chakra" is not the fullness of the Love of the Creator; it is, however, beginning to consciously appreciate and practice that all-encompassing Universal Love that is being the Creator.

The nature of green-ray energy is therefore naturally rooted in total compassion, forgiveness, acceptance (or total non-compassion, non-forgiveness, non-acceptance in the case of the negative practice of service/seeking). This kind of love is 4th-density love: it is love uninformed by wisdom. Green-ray is therefore a love that is foolhardy, for this is the lesson of 4th-density: compassionate understanding or unconditional acceptance (or its inverted opposite for negatively-polarized entities)—yet it is not wisdom; however, it is striving towards wisdom: the lesson of 5th-density and blue ray.

Now, let us rewind and get back to our present space/time nexus: this planetary sphere is but beginning the very early phases of 4th-density. And the lessons of green-ray compassion/love are are not going to be learned in one day nor in one incarnation/lifetime! So it's alright (even expected) to see love uninformed by wisdom. This foolhardiness of 4th-density love leads to the wisdom/love characteristic of 5th-density just as 3rd-density "social/family/group-relations kind of love" lead to the more refined unconditional/planetary love characteristic of 4th density.

There is a reason why green-ray love/compassion precedes blue-ray wisdom/love. Compassionate understanding or unconditional acceptance is central to the Creation, which is why green-ray lies right at the core/center/middle (the "heart") between the 3 lower/outer rays/densities and the 3 higher/inner. This is not at all a random coincidence! It is a perfect Creation of Love.

PS: Tenet Nosce, remember that it is not required for a 3rd-density student to express nor practice nor achieve a perfect 100% score in service-to-others to graduate to 4th-density. Similarly, wisdom is not at all required to graduate to 4D either.

Quote:As we have previously discussed, the "battle" continues on into 4D. It just changes form and is no longer violent.

More specifically, the battle's focus turns from our internal selves and instead towards other-selves. In this way, this whole debate/argument has been very 4D in nature; we are battling not over what we do, but rather what others do. In this grand debate, both sides were coming from places of love; one side directing compassion to their enemies and the other warning to not become inconveniently entangled. The problem is that we handled it like a bunch of 3D monkeys

one quote from Ra wa coming to me earlier:

Quote:16.50 Questioner: Thank you. Is it possible for you to give a short description of the conditions in the fourth density?
Ra: I am Ra. We ask you to consider as we speak that there are not words for positively describing fourth density. We can only explain what is not and approximate what is. Beyond fourth density our ability grows more limited still until we become without words.

That which fourth density is not: it is not of words, unless chosen. It is not of heavy chemical vehicles for body complex activities. It is not of disharmony within self. It is not of disharmony within peoples. It is not within limits of possibility to cause disharmony in any way.

Approximations of positive statements: it is a plane of a type of bipedal vehicle which is much denser and more full of life; it is a plane wherein one is aware of the thoughts of other-selves; it is a plane where one is aware of vibrations of other-selves; it is a plane of compassion and understanding of the sorrows of third density; it is a plane striving towards wisdom or light; it is a plane wherein individual differences are pronounced although automatically harmonized by group consensus.

The reality is that both sides are valid in their concern, and they are both fighting not for themselves but for others. I don't believe Tenet was fearing for his own safety through the groups actions, but rather thought someone in the group might be badly affected by the attempt. That is love for others, shown through Tenet's distortions. The group was attempting to show love to a group most show hate. They, too, were displaying love for others, shown through their own distortions. Our failure was in not recognizing this and not harmonizing this between us all.

I expect this is early 4D catalyst. We are all going to disagree on how to help and who to help and what to wear while doing it until we can get used to the 'playground' we will soon (or now) find ourselves in. Love and light to everyone. We will turn this all into a learning experience; we must be alchemists of positivity

(12-08-2012, 11:58 AM)SomaticDreams Wrote: [ -> ]If we are to have an 'intention to control the recipient to create a specific outcome, then do we not have to control the manner in which we channel the love? If distorted thought forms filter our love in the form of service, is that not how love is 'channeled' or 'controlled' in your mind? Or does this occur some other way?

Oh, I see what you mean. Well that is a great question... I'm not sure. At the least I would say that the flow of love energy can be freely allowed or attenuated to some degree. That is one level of control.

But when we attempt to wield love as a weapon, that is another level of control. I don't think they are one and the same. Just look at interpersonal relationships... two people both love their spouses equally. So the love energy is equally attenuated. One offers that love freely to their spouse; The other seeks to use love to control their spouse.

Quote:Hence why I said entities who are highly unfamiliar or uncomfortable with energy. Being offered something once does not give much choice if rejected. Offering open love constantly gives more chances for a possible recipient. I never claimed it wasn't common place, the questions are a way of probing how you conceptualize these concepts.

But notice in the conceptualization, a distinction was made between simply sending to those who have not asked for it and organizing as a group and sending love to negative entities.

The first I would consider to be an infringement on the order of every day happenings- not too big of a deal. The second involves a different set of dynamics because it: A. Involves group mind activity, and B. Involves (ostensibly) negative entities.

Quote:I believe you are trying to appear as if you have no vested interest in stopping this practice- although you have repeatedly made your points and said this practice was disturbing.

The point of the post is to express my understanding, insofar as I am capable. The responsibility is for me to teach/learn what I know. What anybody does with that information is their own business.

If my own understanding is incorrect- that is a different issue. And we can certainly hash out the logistics here in this thread.

Quote:Pointing out other options is fine, but it indicates that you are pointing to these alternative practices as preferable because they make sense to you. What I am trying to point out is that they do not make logical sense, depending on how you define such terms of love, free will, and the transmission of energy.

The other options don't make logical sense...? Why not?

Quote:It's clear that the disagreement stems from our preconceived and tacit understandings of such concepts such as love, transmission of energy and free will.

I'm certainly open to discussing these concepts. But I don't believe any of that will change the basic notion presented here- Attempting to control others with love is folly.

Unless you want to argue that notion- unless you want to forward a view that controlling others with love is actually a good idea and actually creates the desired outcome- then discussing the foundational concepts of love, transmission of energy and free will is merely academic.

Which again, I'm willing to do. But I don't see how acquiring a more enlightened understanding of these will change the conclusion. The conclusion is self-evident. All we need do is look to our own interpersonal relationships wherein others have attempted to control us with love, or vice-versa, and notice how that worked out.

Quote:This is why I'm curious to your specific definitions of these concepts.

What do you want to know? Would you like me to give an actual definition of these concepts? I'm not sure a concise definition is even possible.

Quote:Specifically, my post was a way of showing you that what you are implying is that in order to try and control others with love, an entity must have a way of controlling love itself, channeling the various ways it is able to be manifested.

Maybe so. But how does that impact the conclusion?

There is a colloquialism- "Kill them with kindness." This is manipulative behavior. And people do it all the time. It is using love in a deceitful way.

Or here is another common practice: Using the threat of withdrawal of love in order to "train" one's children. In this paradigm, when good little boys and girls "follow the rules" they get love... when they are naughty little boys and girls and "break the rules" they don't get love.

Quote:This implies that love is a universal energy field that is channeled through an entity and manifested in particular behavior actions or thought-forms. Is this possible?- or is it that love is 'created' or 'found within' a being and that being has to eliminate all of it's distortions in able to express that love? Is it that being's responsibility? etc etc

Those are very good questions. But how would answering them alter the conclusion that seeking to control and manipulate others is generally not a great idea?

Rather- turn all of these questions on their head and consider the premise behind sending "green bombs" to negative entities. The thought process is that, because it is "love energy" that somehow all of the normal considerations about free will, control, and manipulation don't apply.

Why wouldn't they apply?

Quote:You say these concepts but it's quite clear everyone has their own notions.

Well of course they do. Probably most people (generally speaking) would disagree with me. These are the ones who think there is no problem with using love as a bargaining chip, or who regularly attempt to mold the behavior of others using love, or who try to mask their own negative emotions with love and present a false front to others.

The question I have raised here is in taking these foolish behaviors, and attempting to apply them as a group toward negative entities.

Quote:I'm simply interested in yours. I don't even particularly disagree with most of what you say, it's just that how your explaining it now is muddled with preconceptions/tacit understandings that are not made clear.

Perhaps it would be more instructive for you to offer clarity on the tacit understandings.

I can sympathize with your perspective, Tenet. I'm unable to view the negative polarity as anything other than those who offer to drive the wedge of separation deeper, as a result of our own free will choices (mostly). So I don't see them as "responsible", other than offering a particular service..further distortion. All has its place. I can't say that their catalyst isn't needed for others. Indeed that must be the case, otherwise the catalyst would have been resolved.

Therefore, I'm not sure what I would be releasing the negative polarity from. Finding harmony in understanding the function of polarity is transformative enough it would seem, and is what Ra taught actually. Do I wish negative catalyst for others wasn't around? Of course. Should it be visualized as an object that no longer serves a purpose? I'm not sure, because each situation is unique and I don't want to deny or control something that may be necessary for another (covering up blockage). What I mean is that I don't want to provide only one option, which is the reason Ra suggests detachment from outcome. I can have positive personal bias in any given situation, which is my offering as part of the one infinite, but detachment allows for what is necessary, so that I don't stand completely in the way trying to control the infinite experiencing itself.

Here's a statement that may clarify..

Quote:The function of the healer and crystal may not be over-emphasized, for this power of interruption must needs be controlled, shall we say, with incarnate intelligence; the intelligence being that of one which recognizes energy patterns; which, without judging, recognizes blockage, weakness, and other distortion; and which is capable of visualizing, through the regularity of self and of crystal, the less distorted other-self to be healed.

The role of the healer is to recognize blockage, and if I just meditate for planetary blockage to be released, am I actually providing a "novel view of the self"? The healer communicates to the other what is actually wrong, so that recognition may occur and can be accepted. Wanting to love and forgive the negative polarity is a part of this communication, but you also have to take it a step further and offer a less distorted pattern. This can only be done by making the actual blockage known by way of acknowledging personal responsibility.

So if one wanted to structure a meditation, you could visualize the self as representative of the self existing in ignorance, and rather than directing forgiveness towards a perpetrator, as if they are the ones that are wrong, say "I'm sorry for what I've done to those that I love."

If acceptance is love, and I accept the roles that are necessary..well then there you go.

(12-08-2012, 01:53 PM)Siren Wrote: [ -> ]I believe I do understand where Tenet Nosce is coming from (I've also witnessed the "let's bombard the world with love!" attitude of many/most New Age groups nowadays).

What would you see as the potential consequences of this? In particular, which consequences might be unforeseen due to a relative lack of wisdom with this approach?

Quote:May I toss a few cents?

Your "loose change" is always welcome.

Quote:This is important to keep in mind, for the "heart chakra" is not the fullness of the Love of the Creator; it is, however, beginning to consciously appreciate and practice that all-encompassing Universal Love that is being the Creator.

Exactly. And yet, once the energy has arrived at the "heart chakra" there is a natural propensity for it to overflow into blue and indigo. Attempting to "block" this natural flow is... naturally... a blockage.

Quote:Now, let us rewind and get back to our present space/time nexus: this planetary sphere is but beginning the very early phases of 4th-density.

Which is precisely why there is a certain vulnerability to particular distortions at this nexus.

Quote:And the lessons of green-ray compassion/love are are not going to be learned in one day nor in one incarnation/lifetime!

Certainly not. But that doesn't change the nature of the lessons.

Let's rewind even further- to the beginning of 3D. Certain distorting influences which were present at the beginning of this cycle led directly to an experience of perpetual war and bloodshed. This was not necessary. 3D beings do not need to war with each other in order to learn the lessons of 3D.

Neither do 4D beings need to war with each other in order to learn the lessons of 4D.

Quote:There is a reason why green-ray love/compassion precedes blue-ray wisdom/love. Compassionate understanding or unconditional acceptance is central to the Creation, which is why green-ray lies right at the core/center/middle (the "heart") between the 3 lower/outer rays/densities and the 3 higher/inner. This is not at all a random coincidence! It is a perfect Creation of Love.

Yes- but part of the perfection of the Creation is that the green-ray naturally opens up into blue and indigo. Wherein there is an attempt to keep the energy in green-ray, this generates an imbalance.

Therefore, there is a reciprocal relationship between those who exalt and glorify green-ray above all the others, and those who deny green-ray and exalt/glorify all the other rays above green. In other words- what we perceive as "negative entities" is a balancing mechanism to the overexpression/bias of Creation toward the green-ray.

Balance is the key. To the degree that "positive entities" balance their green-ray activity is to the degree that "negative entities" open up to it.

Quote:PS: Tenet Nosce, remember that it is not required for a 3rd-density student to express nor practice nor achieve a perfect 100% score in service-to-others to graduate to 4th-density. Similarly, wisdom is not at all required to graduate to 4D either.

You are right, wisdom is not required for graduation. On the flip side, there is nothing prohibiting us from contemplating it here and now. All I am doing is offering a signpost at what I perceive to be the appropriate nexus.

The irony is wherein those who consider themselves "loving and compassionate" react with vehemence and take offense whenever an offer of wisdom is made.

(12-08-2012, 02:52 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]The irony is wherein those who consider themselves "loving and compassionate" react with vehemence and take offense whenever an offer of wisdom is made.

There are some that will sit back and watch the humorous effects of the Law of Confusion take place.

(12-08-2012, 03:27 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-08-2012, 02:52 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]The irony is wherein those who consider themselves "loving and compassionate" react with vehemence and take offense whenever an offer of wisdom is made.

There are some that will sit back and watch the humorous effects of the Law of Confusion take place.

Both are true.

Then again, not everyone is in agreement about wisdom.

(12-08-2012, 03:27 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-08-2012, 02:52 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]The irony is wherein those who consider themselves "loving and compassionate" react with vehemence and take offense whenever an offer of wisdom is made.

There are some that will sit back and watch the humorous effects of the Law of Confusion take place.

Humor is a most excellent balancing tool.

67.26 Wrote:There is great humor in your attempt to be of polarized service to the opposite polarity.

67.27 Wrote:You need, in our humble opinion, to look at the humor of the situation and relinquish your desire to serve where no service is requested.

And yet- some find even humor offensive. For some- there is seemingly no end to what they become offended by. It is as if they wake up in the morning seeking a reason to take offense. As if- they don't know what to do with themselves without having a battle to fight.

And when they cannot find something to be offended about themselves, then they will even project offense onto another thus giving themselves a convenient excuse to jump in and rise to the defense of those they think are being oppressed by the seeming "offender." Even when there is no battle, they will fabricate one.

Even when given the suggestion that there is no need for battle... even this suggestion is taken as a cause for offense and interpreted as yet another reason/excuse to "take up arms" and "fight the good fight"!

(12-08-2012, 02:52 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]The irony is wherein those who consider themselves "loving and compassionate" react with vehemence and take offense whenever an offer of wisdom is made.

I agree. There is never any reason to react with vehemence.

But, it can be equally ironic for those who consider themselves "wise" to offer words that aren't wise.

Those who consider themselves loving might not even realize they're acting in a non-loving manner; likewise, those who consider themselves wise might not realize they're acting in an unwise manner.

It can work both ways!

(Not referring to anyone in particular...just a generalization.)

Edit: On 2nd thought, there probably are times when vehemence is appropriate. It's very overused on an internet discussion forum though. What I should have said is that there's never any reason to react with hostility.

(12-08-2012, 03:35 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]Then again, not everyone is in agreement about wisdom.

True. For example, not everybody is in agreement with Ra's view on the wisdom of refraining from battle.

(12-08-2012, 03:50 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]But, it can be equally ironic for those who consider themselves "wise" to offer words that aren't wise.

Yes. Ra gave us an example of this!

17.17 Wrote:Questioner: Can you tell me what the Orion group did in order to try to cause his downfall?

Ra: I am Ra. We may describe in general what occurred. The technique was that of building upon other negatively oriented information. This information had been given by the one whom your peoples called “Yahweh.” This information involved many strictures upon behavior and promised power of the third-density, service-to-self nature. These two types of distortions were impressed upon those already oriented to think these thought-forms.

This eventually led to many challenges of the entity known as Jesus. It eventually led to one, sound vibration complex “Judas,” as you call this entity, who believed that it was doing the appropriate thing in bringing about or forcing upon the one you call Jesus the necessity for bringing in the third-density planetary power distortion of third-density rule over others.

This entity, Judas, felt that, if pushed into a corner, the entity you call Jesus would then be able to see the wisdom of using the power of intelligent infinity in order to rule others. The one you call Judas was mistaken in this estimation of the reaction of the entity, Jesus, whose teach/learning was not oriented towards this distortion. This resulted in the destruction of the bodily complex of the one known as Jesus to you.

Ra also suggested that those of us seeking more normal lifespans should seek to accept both wisdom and love:

22.6 Wrote:Thus the shortened life span is due to the necessity for removing an entity from the intensity of experience which ensues when wisdom and love are, having been rejected, reflected back into the consciousness of the Creator without being accepted as part of the self, this then causing the entity to have the need for healing and for much evaluation of the incarnation.

I might suggest that those who are currently feeling a certain "intensity" during these times may wish to consider where wisdom and/or love have been rejected.

Wisdom, like love, faith, and compassion, can be applied across all densities. The notion that we should reject wisdom because it is "of fifth density" and "we are not there yet" is faulty. The Ra Material is jam-packed with information about Ra's folly in being overbalanced in love/compassion, and relatively lacking in wisdom/faith. They detail the surprises which were in store for them later in their development, and explicitly share how their relatively unwise view resulted in unforeseen consequences. This not only negatively impacted the development of humanity, but resulted in the necessity of Ra's lengthy remediation upon graduation to 5D.

If it were inappropriate for Ra to share this information with us, they wouldn't have done so.

Why any student of the Ra Material would willfully ignore these teachings is beyond my understanding. But I acknowledge that each has their own path to walk. Apparently, some have decided to repeat the same "mistakes" Ra made. There is no "right or wrong" in this. Just folly.

(12-08-2012, 03:56 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-08-2012, 03:35 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]Then again, not everyone is in agreement about wisdom.

True. For example, not everybody is in agreement with Ra's view on the wisdom of refraining from battle.

Not everyone is in agreement as to what a battle even is.

(12-08-2012, 03:56 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Ra also suggested that those of us seeking more normal lifespans should seek to accept both wisdom and love:

That's not quite how I interpreted that statement, but I can see how you interpreted it that way.

(12-08-2012, 03:56 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]I might suggest that those who are currently feeling a certain "intensity" during these times may wish to consider where wisdom and/or love have been rejected.

That's certainly worth considering!

It might not necessarily be the case, though. Some might be feeling intensity simply because they took on a heavy class load.

It could even be the opposite of what you suggest: Intensity might actually increase as the entity utilizes more and more catalyst, and then takes on yet more, seeking to make the best possible use of their time here.

I wouldn't consider intensity as any sort of indicator of whether or not the person is rejecting love or wisdom.

(12-08-2012, 03:56 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Wisdom, like love, can be applied across all densities. The notion that we should reject wisdom because it is "of fifth density" is faulty.

True. As is the notion that we should reject compassion because it is "of 4th density" and we might be "higher" and "more balanced."

(12-08-2012, 04:19 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't consider intensity as any sort of indicator of whether or not the person is rejecting love or wisdom.

That's true. Each must decide for themselves whether or not such a consideration is fruitful. It is merely a suggestion.

Quote:True. As is the notion that we should reject compassion because it is "of 4th density" and we might be "higher" and "more balanced."

We should reject compassion if we are seeking to polarize on the negative path. On the other hand, seeking to temper unbridled compassion with other qualities is an important aspect of balancing.

As you noted in another thread, there is a difference in seeking to turn down compassion, and seeking to turn up other qualities which balance and round-out compassion.

(12-08-2012, 04:25 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]We should reject compassion if we are seeking to polarize on the negative path.

Yes, but since this forum is biased towards STO, we usually make the assumption that we're all on the same page. It is an underlying presupposition in all our discussions.

(12-08-2012, 04:25 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]On the other hand, seeking to temper unbridled compassion with other qualities is an important aspect of balancing.

In the long run, yes, but not in the short term. Balancing might not even be on the agenda at all for most who are presently incarnate here in 3D. It might be part of the curriculum for some Wanderers, but even that might be secondary to their mission. We don't all have the same objectives, so we can't assume that everyone here is seeking balance.

I think balance is overrated. Why should we be concerned about something that takes millions of years to achieve? And even then, there might be yet higher levels of 'balance' to aspire to. I think it's more of a distraction, really. And sometimes a justification.

(12-08-2012, 04:25 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]As you noted in another thread, there is a difference in seeking to turn down compassion, and seeking to turn up other qualities which balance and round-out compassion.

Exactly! Except, based on my observations here, more often than not what's presented is a downplaying of compassion, rather than a turning up of other qualities.

If one turns down the compassion, without anything else being rounded out, then what is left? Nothing.

(12-08-2012, 01:53 PM)hogey11 Wrote: [ -> ]More specifically, the battle's focus turns from our internal selves and instead towards other-selves.

What is the difference between the inside and the outside? There has been an abundance of external battle in our 3D experience. I might suggest that the externalization of the battle is a direct result of a refusal to acknowledge the inner battle.

The warmongers of society believe that their internal affairs are in order. They know what is right and what is wrong. And they further believe that it is right to impose their own beliefs onto others, even unto death and slaughter.

They see no contradiction in this. They make war Monday through Saturday, and go to church on Sunday.

Quote:In this grand debate, both sides were coming from places of love; one side directing compassion to their enemies and the other warning to not become inconveniently entangled. The problem is that we handled it like a bunch of 3D monkeys

Nah. 3DMonkey would have posted a picture of a hamburger in the middle of the thread, and found it humorous.

But seriously- yes I think you are correct in your estimation here.

Quote:I don't believe Tenet was fearing for his own safety through the groups actions, but rather thought someone in the group might be badly affected by the attempt. That is love for others, shown through Tenet's distortions. The group was attempting to show love to a group most show hate. They, too, were displaying love for others, shown through their own distortions. Our failure was in not recognizing this and not harmonizing this between us all.

You are correct in assuming that I am not fearing for my safety. The intention of this post is to draw attention to the potential for unforeseen consequences. And also to point out that this potential can be reduced by seeking the wisdom to refrain from battle.

Quote:I expect this is early 4D catalyst. We are all going to disagree on how to help and who to help and what to wear while doing it until we can get used to the 'playground' we will soon (or now) find ourselves in. Love and light to everyone. We will turn this all into a learning experience; we must be alchemists of positivity

I would expect the lessons of early 4D to not be too much different than those we are already familiar with. For example:

Quote:Passengers are instructed to make sure their oxygen masks are on first before assisting other passengers or children.

i agree with u tenet. i have absolutely zero interest in sending love to certain entities that i consider evil. i also have zero interest in sending hate to them because that just ensnares me in their energy then i am dancing with a partner i really dont want to be with. me personally i release them i figure the creator knows what it is doing and i will focus more on working on myself. for me the letting go of animosity towards those i consider evil is a very big step and i am happy to be in that place. now radiating love outwards from myself just in general to the whole world i have absolutely no problem with. if it happens to effect those i consider evil so be it but i am not specifically sending the love to them.

norral

In such cases I usually find it pertinent to remember some key words from Seth. We would all do wise to acknowledge;

"I come here because it is fun. I have fun when I come here. I do not come here because I feel that I have any great responsibility for your beings or welfare. Who am I to set myself against the innate wisdom of your own individual being, or to take upon my invisible shoulders the great privilege or joyful responsibility for your behavior and destiny?" - Seth Audio Collection

(12-08-2012, 02:05 PM)Icaro Wrote: [ -> ]I can sympathize with your perspective, Tenet. I'm unable to view the negative polarity as anything other than those who offer to drive the wedge of separation deeper, as a result of our own free will choices (mostly). So I don't see them as "responsible", other than offering a particular service..further distortion. All has its place. I can't say that their catalyst isn't needed for others. Indeed that must be the case, otherwise the catalyst would have been resolved.

Yes.

Quote:Therefore, I'm not sure what I would be releasing the negative polarity from. Finding harmony in understanding the function of polarity is transformative enough it would seem, and is what Ra taught actually. Do I wish negative catalyst for others wasn't around? Of course. Should it be visualized as an object that no longer serves a purpose? I'm not sure, because each situation is unique and I don't want to deny or control something that may be necessary for another (covering up blockage). What I mean is that I don't want to provide only one option, which is the reason Ra suggests detachment from outcome. I can have positive personal bias in any given situation, which is my offering as part of the one infinite, but detachment allows for what is necessary, so that I don't stand completely in the way trying to control the infinite experiencing itself.

That sounds like a balanced perspective to me.

Quote:The function of the healer and crystal may not be over-emphasized, for this power of interruption must needs be controlled, shall we say, with incarnate intelligence; the intelligence being that of one which recognizes energy patterns; which, without judging, recognizes blockage, weakness, and other distortion; and which is capable of visualizing, through the regularity of self and of crystal, the less distorted other-self to be healed.

Yes. As they say, without judgment.

Quote:The role of the healer is to recognize blockage, and if I just meditate for planetary blockage to be released, am I actually providing a "novel view of the self"?

Such a meditation would release you from becoming entangled in the particular mechanisms involved in such a release. Which are certainly more complex than we could probably begin to fathom. I would estimate this type of approach would be much less confusing, and therefore more effective.

Quote:The healer communicates to the other what is actually wrong, so that recognition may occur and can be accepted. Wanting to love and forgive the negative polarity is a part of this communication, but you also have to take it a step further and offer a less distorted pattern. This can only be done by making the actual blockage known by way of acknowledging personal responsibility.

Yes.

Quote:So if one wanted to structure a meditation, you could visualize the self as representative of the self existing in ignorance, and rather than directing forgiveness towards a perpetrator, as if they are the ones that are wrong, say "I'm sorry for what I've done to those that I love."

Precisely!

Quote:If acceptance is love, and I accept the roles that are necessary..well then there you go.

Mission accomplished. No battle necessary.

---

(12-08-2012, 05:22 PM)Horuseus Wrote: [ -> ]In such cases I usually find it pertinent to remember some key words from Seth. We would all do wise to acknowledge;

"I come here because it is fun. I have fun when I come here. I do not come here because I feel that I have any great responsibility for your beings or welfare. Who am I to set myself against the innate wisdom of your own individual being, or to take upon my invisible shoulders the great privilege or joyful responsibility for your behavior and destiny?" - Seth Audio Collection

Great quote!

And yet, "You get what you concentrate upon, there is no other main rule." So therefore, what do we get if we concentrate upon "negative entities" whether real or perceived?

(12-08-2012, 05:26 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Great quote!

And yet, "You get what you concentrate upon, there is no other main rule." So therefore, what do we get if we concentrate upon "negative entities" whether real or perceived?

Indeed. I find it's a helpful reminder to also not take this life too seriously either. We are all simply actors in this grand game afterall, hah.

The second quote in question would as I understand refer to Energy. 'Energy follows thought' and thus what you concentrate (direct thought to) will literally manifest on some level or another.

Notice the phrase in western society 'Pay Attention'. Your attention (Concentration/thought) is quite literally currency in this reality.

(12-08-2012, 05:26 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Such a meditation would release you from becoming entangled in the particular mechanisms involved in such a release. Which are certainly more complex than we could probably begin to fathom. I would estimate this type of approach would be much less confusing, and therefore more effective.

Sorry, I wasn't thorough. I meant such a meditation to send love towards a group in an attempt to release blockage doesn't fully do so, because the whole nature of the blockage has yet to be fully identified. After considering this for quite awhile I'm not going to say it's wrong, but it's not something I would do. Been there done that. It is a necessary step in overall development of the individual, and it heals, but it isn't complete because there is still a separative energy present. There is still blue/in-pouring info about the "self" and indigo/unifying energy available.