05-26-2014, 07:01 PM
Fang
05-26-2014, 07:06 PM
Quote:How would you define a lack of faith and negative faith?Well since you are declaring that these are the only ways to accept catalyst how about you tell us so we can understand what you are talking about?
05-26-2014, 07:07 PM
What has Ra called the Catalyst of the Spirit? Faith? 
Fang
05-26-2014, 07:17 PM
The actual mental process of acceptance, rarian or no
Unconscious Identification-> Conscious acknowledgement-> Honest evaluation*-> Acceptance and integration of experience
*The evaluation needs to be honest if you want to accept the (what I would call experience in other circles) "catalyst" as it was actually perceived. Otherwise the individual does not accept "catalyst" but rather what they would have liked to experience and that is not acceptance of experience as the alleged experience was not experienced. That's substitution of phantasy for reality.
That's the process, I don't know about faith or negative faith.
That substitution of ideas for experience that results in people becoming ungrounded that zm talked about is a product of that dishonest evaluation
Unconscious Identification-> Conscious acknowledgement-> Honest evaluation*-> Acceptance and integration of experience
*The evaluation needs to be honest if you want to accept the (what I would call experience in other circles) "catalyst" as it was actually perceived. Otherwise the individual does not accept "catalyst" but rather what they would have liked to experience and that is not acceptance of experience as the alleged experience was not experienced. That's substitution of phantasy for reality.
That's the process, I don't know about faith or negative faith.
That substitution of ideas for experience that results in people becoming ungrounded that zm talked about is a product of that dishonest evaluation
05-26-2014, 07:37 PM
How do you define accepting catalyst?
Why reject catalyst as suppose to control catalyst, as 'rarians' would say (lol@rarian)?
How do you define 'reject' catalyst then?
Why reject catalyst as suppose to control catalyst, as 'rarians' would say (lol@rarian)?
How do you define 'reject' catalyst then?
Fang
05-26-2014, 08:28 PM
Quote:How do you define accepting catalyst?well I used catalyst kinda reluctantly, I would much rather use the word experience, A1 kinda uses Catalyst and Experience interchangeably which is really a conflation of concepts which makes things tricky to explain concisely when addressing because I have to do it to. I was really talking more about experience than catalyst.
Quote:Why reject catalyst as suppose to control catalyst, as 'rarians' would say (lol@rarian)?Lol, I use the word Rarian to indicate context, these terms would mean other things outside the Ra Material, we are discussing a text and not reality after all, or at least reality in the context of a text. Well rejection is easier, path of least resistance.
Quote:How do you define 'reject' catalyst then?Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la la la I can't hear you" to the world.
05-26-2014, 09:07 PM
I wish to speak only on a Rarian basis as this has little applicable or practical meaning towards a pleasurable and peaceful experience in my life.
How can this method make my life better assuming I am incorrect?
How can this method make my life better assuming I am incorrect?
05-27-2014, 12:26 AM
What's your view Adonai: What is accepting catalyst? Why did you use reject catalyst instead of control? And what does it mean to reject catalyst?
05-27-2014, 12:37 AM
Accepting a catalyst to me is having faith all desires will be met in regards to the respective catalyst. Neglecting a catalyst is refusing to acknowledge desires in the face of a catalyst. Rejecting a catalyst is having a faith in ones desires so far as to reject all other possibilities in regards to the catalyst provided.
Catalyst: A person wishes to be my friend.
Acceptance: I accept the person's affection in my life without expectation from the person.
Neglect: I accept them as a casual friend without any care for what the person does. I will discard the person whenever it suits me. Why does this person want to waste my time? I want to spend more time with my husband who buys me things.
Rejection: The person will aid me for the rest of life, whatever it takes. Else they have failed me and I will ensure they will repay their injustice. A friendship is forever.
---
Catalyst: Somebody wants me to give them money.
Acceptance: I cannot give them money right now. I will help them in the best way I can.
Neglect: This person is a parasite. He does not deserve my money.
Rejection: Come with me. I will teach you how to be productive, you just have to do certain things for me. If you do not obey, I will cast you back to the streets. Things have to be earned.
Control is rejection of what cannot be provided to the self.
Catalyst: A person wishes to be my friend.
Acceptance: I accept the person's affection in my life without expectation from the person.
Neglect: I accept them as a casual friend without any care for what the person does. I will discard the person whenever it suits me. Why does this person want to waste my time? I want to spend more time with my husband who buys me things.
Rejection: The person will aid me for the rest of life, whatever it takes. Else they have failed me and I will ensure they will repay their injustice. A friendship is forever.
---
Catalyst: Somebody wants me to give them money.
Acceptance: I cannot give them money right now. I will help them in the best way I can.
Neglect: This person is a parasite. He does not deserve my money.
Rejection: Come with me. I will teach you how to be productive, you just have to do certain things for me. If you do not obey, I will cast you back to the streets. Things have to be earned.
Control is rejection of what cannot be provided to the self.
05-27-2014, 01:00 AM
If you permit, I would share my view:
It is my understanding that accepting a catalyst would lead to the experiencing of it and the rejection of catalyst would lead in the absence of experience of it. An unpolarized state or a state in-between acceptance and rejection would be, perhaps, one accepting the catalyst but soledly under certain conditions, resulting in the application of control over the situation (conditional acceptance).
In the examples you post Adonai, I would make the following correction: a true rejection of a catalyst would result in the person walking away from the situation - no to being friends and no to lending money. That is, in my understanding, complete control (or conviction) also known as a lack of faith.
It is my understanding that accepting a catalyst would lead to the experiencing of it and the rejection of catalyst would lead in the absence of experience of it. An unpolarized state or a state in-between acceptance and rejection would be, perhaps, one accepting the catalyst but soledly under certain conditions, resulting in the application of control over the situation (conditional acceptance).
In the examples you post Adonai, I would make the following correction: a true rejection of a catalyst would result in the person walking away from the situation - no to being friends and no to lending money. That is, in my understanding, complete control (or conviction) also known as a lack of faith.
05-27-2014, 01:01 AM
If you want to be on the path of complete momentum of rejecting catalyst, you have to falsify things, you have to build your will. Your correction lacks will towards either polarity. The negative polarizing entity on this plane would need to be constantly shaping people in order to polarize at all. Thus I consider your correction depolarized.
Both polarities need to accept and reject catalyst to a certain degree. The positive entity will need to neglect certain desires of all involved (not to the point of sacrifice). The negative entity will need to absolutely negate its desires of not helping people, in order to shape things into its vision.
Both paths have compromises. The positive path's compromises are as little as possible if work is to be done efficiently and in a state of peace.
From a real-life discussion with my wife: Vervex is speaking in a universal context, I'm speaking in a Earthly concept. A completely negatively polarized entity that has absoluted its will to the rejection of most minor catalyst properly would not see the person needing money at all. If you're seeking the negative polarity on Earth, then you need to start off with small stuff and shaping people.
Both polarities need to accept and reject catalyst to a certain degree. The positive entity will need to neglect certain desires of all involved (not to the point of sacrifice). The negative entity will need to absolutely negate its desires of not helping people, in order to shape things into its vision.
Both paths have compromises. The positive path's compromises are as little as possible if work is to be done efficiently and in a state of peace.
From a real-life discussion with my wife: Vervex is speaking in a universal context, I'm speaking in a Earthly concept. A completely negatively polarized entity that has absoluted its will to the rejection of most minor catalyst properly would not see the person needing money at all. If you're seeking the negative polarity on Earth, then you need to start off with small stuff and shaping people.