I've touched this subject subtly in different aways and others have responded to this indirectly but I think it deserves it's own focused topic.
Is there any value in feigning unconditional love for a person and being silent around them because you are afraid to evoke "an unbalanced response"? Are unbalanced responses and balanced responses all that makes love? Or is there something more to it?
Would a person with a true desire to love not want to truly get to know and express themselves to a person even as unbalanced as they might be and vice-versa?
For instance, is it really unloving and unbalanced to tell a person you are angry? Should we really just shun our desires and pretend not to be angry at all?
When you get to the nitty gritty, I think it is important to differentiate between the love of the green ray and other forms of love. Some subscribe to the theory that all of the centers embody a form of love. I currently subscribe to that theory. I think this is the basis of saying that all things are love. However, much as negatives work primarily with the yellow-ray love (love of power, that then distorts into control because of imbalances in the other centers), positives work primarily with the green ray love (love for other selves to inadequately paraphrase).
I believe there are very few maxims. Thus, to answer your question "For instance, is it really unloving and unbalanced to tell a person you are angry?", it depends on the individual's need for balancing and distortion. However, I can say that in response to your question "Is there any value in feigning unconditional love for a person and being silent around them because you are afraid to evoke "an unbalanced response"?" to look at the concepts you raise. "Feign" (blue?) "unconditional love" (green?) "afraid" (red/orange/yellow?) "unbalanced responses" (blue/yellow?). These all touch upon and strength or diminish certain beliefs in all the centers. I think once you look at these, the specific answer to your question will become clear as to whether this is a more or less balanced way to do this. Note also that the same action can be taken, but for different reasons, changes the way your centers operate. That being said, there are certain generalities that can be observed.
If you are polarizing negatively, you would look at both overall balance (barring green and blue) and also on it's individual effect on empowering your yellow. If you are polarizing positively, you would look at both overall balance (including green and blue) and also on it's individual effect on empowering your green. As Carla and others have mentioned, I think it is important to communicate your feelings, but the communication is often best if it stems from the heart. Often, it can be difficult to do this while angry. However, I think it is key that everyone continues to explore and push their boundaries with respect to balancing. If you have tried telling someone you are angry with the idea of doing it from an open heart and keep failing at opening that heart during the process, perhaps there is something else you should try instead. Or if you feel you are on the verge of opening the heart even while angry, perhaps you should continue. It turns on self-awareness of the balancing process.
I think, in the end, it is all about self-awareness and balancing, and trial and error specific to your own needs, balances, imbalances, and distortions. It's almost like treating life as a constant experiment on how you react to catalyst.
p.s. If you would like specific, non-general advice as to what you, the entity known as Adonai One should do, only you can truly answer that question. However, if you want to ask me or anyone else for specific, non-general advice, I or others can try and humbly assist.
Would it be accurate to say that green-based love is about unifying further with creation? And would further unifying with creation require a desire to know it fully?
To acknowledge your post fully, yes, you are correct. For there is a wise way to do things in our methods of balancing.
The form the expression takes it utmost in my mind. One should not shun any part of themselves, however I also don't take that as a license to project the self all over others. For example, if I am angry, even if as a result of my perception of something another did, it is still my own anger and there is a big difference, to me, between telling someone you are angry, whether with them or anything else, and actually projecting that anger at the individual.
I think there are mixed interpretations of what "expressing anger/fear/doubt/etc" is, in terms of the form of the delivery. Some people see the expression of such emotions as the allowance of the dominance of that emotion over their communication, although I see this as projection. I, personally, see it that the actual expression of the emotion can come through many mediums, and I use music and art and whatnot for that.
However, it is part of blue ray communication to share in the awareness one has with others, so the communication that one is experiencing anger or any other negative emotion is healthy, so long as it doesn't just become an attachment to the emotion through projection at another,
There is an old alchemist adage that goes: The heart adds, the intellect subtracts, the spirit divides and the soul multiplies. Yes, I would say green-ray love is all about "adding" everything together.
(07-13-2013, 05:05 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Would it be accurate to say that green-based love is about unifying further with creation? And would further unifying with creation require a desire to know it fully?
To acknowledge your post fully, yes, you are correct. For there is a wise way to do things in our methods of balancing.
Love of unification with creation I believe seems to be more of a Violet ray concept to me. Green ray seems more centered toward other selves. But I could be wrong!
True, green-ray love still acknowledges differences and separation, and seems to me to be more like the love of the Earth as it would love the parts of itself, and less about unification in terms of polarities or unification with creation which does seem more violet ray which is all about unity.
(07-13-2013, 05:12 PM)xise Wrote: [ -> ] (07-13-2013, 05:05 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Would it be accurate to say that green-based love is about unifying further with creation? And would further unifying with creation require a desire to know it fully?
To acknowledge your post fully, yes, you are correct. For there is a wise way to do things in our methods of balancing.
Love of unification with creation I believe seems to be more of a Violet ray concept to me. Green ray seems more centered toward other selves. But I could be wrong!
Yes, complete unification is a violet-ray concept. But until that point it is a gradual progression to that point through what we call love.
Is loving otherselves the engine that drives us to unify with them eons down-the-line?
Anyways, you are not wrong. You see a key difference that I've been trying to evoke but not in the same way.
Depends on which side you are on, but I would say that it is the love of otherselves which ultimately leads to the integration of polarities as an expression of the love for the creator which is eventually fully realized as both self and other self.
However, it may be notable that the STS path is supposedly defined by a lack of green-ray love and/or blue-ray communication.
(07-13-2013, 05:24 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]However, it may be notable that the STS path is supposedly defined by a lack of green-ray love and/or blue-ray communication.
A STS social memory complex will show how this works out in practice. Carla on a recent podcast really put a distinction between a "hivemind" and true unity.
Of course it works and can be put in to practice aha doesn't change the fact that one or two of the rays is being suppressed. Perfectly acceptable and functional, yet it is what it is.
(07-13-2013, 05:42 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]Of course it works and can be put in to practice aha doesn't change the fact that one or two of the rays is being suppressed. Perfectly acceptable and functional, yet it is what it is.
Eh, I wouldn't say functional when they purportedly divorce all the time. Unless we're talking about something different entirely. Haha.
It is functional in terms that it functions as a valid method of self exploration. The fulfillment of the function is the function of the experience of total self-creatorhood exclusive of other selves. It is functional to achieve that, but, of course, less functional if set to other tasks, or goals.
(07-13-2013, 05:49 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]It is functional in terms that it functions as a valid method of self exploration. The fulfillment of the function is the function of the experience of total self-creatorhood exclusive of other selves. It is functional to achieve that, but, of course, less functional if set to other tasks, or goals.
Ah yes, indeed, it is functional in that respect. Heh. I see now.
The design denotes function, but there is an infinity of functionality.
(07-13-2013, 04:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]For instance, is it really unloving and unbalanced to tell a person you are angry? Should we really just shun our desires and pretend not to be angry at all?
There is no such thing as "un-loving." There are only distortions of Love. And that great Thought that is unconditional/undistorted Love is not angry—It is an orgasmic Thought of infinite bliss.
Quote:Is there any value in feigning unconditional love
You cannot feign love because Love/Thought is what you are. You can only
fool yourself. And of course, you can feign
compassion or
honesty. However, there is no value in this except in the negative pursuit of Love.
Good post, also, for some reason whenever I imagine you as a philosophical raptor I place you in the context of the show Dinosaurs, hehe, nostalgic.
(07-13-2013, 06:16 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]Good post, also, for some reason whenever I imagine you as a philosophical raptor I place you in the context of the show Dinosaurs, hehe, nostalgic.
Yes, I am getting some peculiar reactions...
Not for very long, though. The Raptor will soon shed its skin, so to speak, and reveal its true identity!
Ooh, I await with exquisite anticipation of the unexpected, as my reiki master used to say aha
(07-13-2013, 04:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]I've touched this subject subtly in different aways and others have responded to this indirectly but I think it deserves it's own focused topic.
Is there any value in feigning unconditional love for a person and being silent around them because you are afraid to evoke "an unbalanced response"? Are unbalanced responses and balanced responses all that makes love? Or is there something more to it?
Would a person with a true desire to love not want to truly get to know and express themselves to a person even as unbalanced as they might be and vice-versa?
For instance, is it really unloving and unbalanced to tell a person you are angry? Should we really just shun our desires and pretend not to be angry at all?
Faking a certain level of love is disingenuous, and unhelpful to yourself and others.
Also, acting from a state of anger will rarely bring you desirable results. An emotional signal of that much negativity is a clear sign from your Higher Self that whatever you are focused upon in this moment is very much at odds with what would make you happy. Think of emotions as your Higher Self's way of saying "warmer" "warmer" "colder" "colder", in your search for peace, joy, and love. You are getting feedback about your every thought, all the time. Unfortunately, most train themselves to ignore this invaluable feedback.
People always talk about creating their own reality. Until they don't like what they are experiencing, and then they deny all responsibility for it. But the thing is, there is no assertion in this universe we live in. Everything that you experience is invited by you, at some level of your being. Even if it appears to be coming from others. It wouldn't be in your experience if you weren't a vibrational match for it. So what to do?
Find a better feeling focus.
Trying to get to the bottom of the issue is a never ending pit. The more you look, the more you become a vibrational match to the essence of the imbalance, and the universe just keeps yielding more experiences like it to you via the law of attraction. It's a little like the over used adage goes, "Hate of war will not bring peace, only love of peace will".
If someone were making me angry, what I would do is spend some time thinking about the positive aspects of that person, even if there are few to contemplate. As you do this, you will most likely feel your emotions change. Your Higher Self will not join you in negative thought (it doesn't find fault with others), so when you get your mind off the negativity you will begin to once again feel the joy of that communion, and have the advantage of its broader perspective.
There are many subtleties to this process which will reveal themselves as you go along.
There is a difference between honestly communicating anger, and acting on it.
You can say "I'm really angry right now.", and proceed to communicate honestly what is making you angry and what (if any) the other party has done to produce this reaction in you. Or you can pretend that you aren't angry and fake kindness and what you believe to be unconditional love thinking that as long as we're trying to show kindness through lies that they are more beneficial than the truth.
Sorry for the massive run-on, but I have a feeling this is more or less already answered in the thread.
“Start by contemplating your motives for giving or loving. In other words, when you are ‘giving’, what do you personally stand to lose or gain from that giv- ing? Is there a selfish motive involved at all? If so, it contaminates any real unselfish giving and Love that may have been there also. When you are ‘loving’, what will you be getting back from the one you ‘love’? For instance, if you give a gift to your lover, don’t you expect to get gratitude and extra affection? Selfish motives are behind giving or loving in what would be called a ‘normal’ relationship. Often, even when people give to their lover, there is a subtle motive to get something back. Because when you give to your lover, feeding their wants and desires, they like it, they ‘get off on it’ as you put it - then they like you because you are giving them the things or feelings they want - and we know that. Thus YOU get a response from them that ‘gets YOU off’. That’s ideally how it works in a normal relation- ship, but it’s often not the case. There is also an expectation of reciprocation, which is ultimately never met.”
from book "The Children of The Law of One & The Lost Teachings of Atlantis"
interesting to me is that almost any time some new question posts appear on forum i read a meaningful part on it from 1 book or other ,
(07-13-2013, 05:15 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]True, green-ray love still acknowledges differences and separation, and seems to me to be more like the love of the Earth as it would love the parts of itself, and less about unification in terms of polarities or unification with creation which does seem more violet ray which is all about unity.
Is the higher self an indigo body or a violet body? Seeing it's still 6D I think it's indigo, and the mbs totality is a violet ray body. Just curious.
(07-13-2013, 07:37 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]An emotional signal of that much negativity is a clear sign from your Higher Self that whatever you are focused upon in this moment is very much at odds with what would make you happy. Think of emotions as your Higher Self's way of saying "warmer" "warmer" "colder" "colder", in your search for peace, joy, and love. You are getting feedback about your every thought, all the time. Unfortunately, most train themselves to ignore this invaluable feedback.
True. I find peace mostly when I'm doing nothing at all. I think I'll enjoy 4D or higher densities, though I'm not sure if you're doing nothing at all or working your tail off in the higher densities. Ra called them etoliated (sp?) realms, which I think means protracted or drawn out. So I'll have a long time to ponder over ways of being of service. 90,000 years in 4D, and I don't know how long an incarnation is in 6D (which is mostly time/space). Sorry if I'm off on a tangent.