Adonai One Wrote:I accept all-selves.
I reject all-selves.
That is all. In order to progress in this space/time continuum, you must make one of these choices and commit to it fully as a unified desire. To choose to make both choices in any capacity is to confuse the mind/body/spirit complex so far as to cause it to be without choice and without will.
This is The Choice as conveyed by my belief/understanding.
Adonai, l don't think it's possible (within 3D) to truly accept/reject all-selves. And to strive for such would inevitably cause great suffering, either way. I believe we all have our unique choices to make, again and again, based on our specific life-lessons/experience.
Every choice is an acceptance or rejection depending on your polarity. This is my own belief/understanding.
(03-18-2014, 06:10 PM)Melissa Wrote: [ -> ]Adonai, l don't think it's possible (within 3D) to truly accept/reject all-selves. And to strive for such would inevitably cause great suffering, either way. I believe we all have our unique choices to make, again and again, based on our specific life-lessons/experience.
It's not really possible get 100% either way, but isn't the strive for it, the choice, the whole point of 3D? If one wants to progress that is. I'm quite happy 50% and going nowhere polarity wise for the moment.
I desire to confirm that the purpose of this density/illusion is to begin to make The Choice.
Am I missing something, because I thought that was a given..?
(03-18-2014, 07:04 PM)Steppenwolf Wrote: [ -> ]Am I missing something, because I thought that was a given..?
You would be surprised how many are confused in this regard.
I just don't want my desire in gaining polarity to be determined selfish when I pass over.
What you know as selfishness is in-fact acceptance of the self. This is a necessity in the positive polarity as are we not all one self? The positive polarity is not about denying the self in the face of the other but rather unifying the self with the other. There is not only one self in regards to the creator having a single desire for itself but rather the creator knowing itself through all desires, even yours. This brings us to the question: Are we not all things or are not all things of the self?
This is my own belief/understanding.
The choice is the ability to choose. In 3rd density you can't consciously accept or reject all selves as you are not conscious of all selves. Gotta crawl before you can walk.
In my belief/understanding, this choice can be made in this density. I believe not to make this choice is to remain depolarized. The question I ask to you is this: Does not unconditional love convey love to all-selves?
This is my own belief/understanding.
This density is the density where the choice can be first made yep.
Quote:I believe not to make this choice is to remain depolarized.
Yeah that's true
Quote:The question I ask to you is this: Does not unconditional love convey love to all-selves?
Well, yes, but as a 3rd density entity you can not actually have "unconditional love", the 3rd density entity hardly even knows what love is.
I understand this belief. I cannot say I agree.
My point is my dear fellow that "unconditional love" in the Ra-rian sense (lol) is not something available to the third density entity. Compassion is a reaction here rather than an action and while we can "love" what we are conscious of (after evaluation and acceptance) it's really not possible to have love for all that is and everyone as we are not conscious of all that is. By illuminating the darkness (making the unconscious conscious) we effectively are becoming more whole, being given more of an opportunity to accept and love what we are conscious of allowing us to illuminate further, you can't just jump to suddenly "loving all there is".
I'd like to say I love some people unconditionally but really, being human it's not like I won't at times get angry or upset at them and then go back to loving them after accepting the new catalyst and experience, so it's not really unconditional is it?
"Unconditional love" for the sake of polarizing or spiritual progression isn't unconditional either for obvious reasons.
Th choice, as first made available to the self aware entity (3rd density) is not as absolute as "all selves".
To "begin" to make the choice? I'm thinking that ability must be made available long before harvestable polarizations are reached via that conscious viewpoint. "In the context of doing work in the disciplines of the personality, in order to be of more full efficiency in the central acceptance of the self, it is first quite necessary to know the distortions of the self which the entity is accepting. Each thought and action needs must then be scrutinized for the precise foundation of the distortions of any reactions. This process shall lead to the more central task of acceptance."
The Choice is but the beginning as the choices become more vast in the later densities. However, the choices will always be between an acceptance of a portion of the creator and a rejection there such. This is my belief/understanding.
So when are the decisions made? Ra says that the choice can be made whether one is conscious of the Law of One or not as there comes with the growing awareness of other selves a desire or realization that one is able to interact with them in a way that is either leaning towards higher energy gain for the self, or a mutual empowerment with the other/offering of energy gain through energy transfer. Those who seek to gain more than to give in each exchange could be said to be polarizing in service to self, to use Ra's terms. Thus the opposite would be those that seek to give although mutual empowerment is often also a natural outcome of this, although not always. Sometimes one gives until there is nothing left for even the basic vitality of the self, which is a disservice to both self and other, really. Other times there are those who take until the vitality of others is sucked away.
While I see and understand your choice and use of the word concepts of acceptance and rejection I would use terms which are less emotionally derived in my eyes, although they are of course acceptable. I would think of it as more like being polarize either by being vertically oriented (aligned with spirit/creator, unity) or being horizontally oriented (aligned with matter/creation, apportioned/cellular unity). Unity is reached either way, but the exact manifestation takes each upon a different view and journey of the creative self.
Another way I view it is that polarization obviously requires poles. The octave structure has as its poles first density and eighth density which is also the first of the next octave. Each density reflects these poles and so each density also has a first density through to eighth, the sub-densities. The choice is available in third density which occurs when the individual entity has become self aware enough to then become aware of other selves and gradually a bias is formed through which polarization begins to occur. This may take many, many lifetimes for this bias to develop, but it eventually culminates in a decision, something which cuts through the mire of infinite choice and sheds light upon a core path, focus and journey.
Thus, fourth density begins when the individual has sufficiently made kinetic the potential bias they have built up over many lives, or fewer for some. Third density doesn't end with the decision however, as that decision must be maintained for polarity to continue to be built, but once the decision is made the faith and will of the individual strengthens greatly.
IMO. <3
Love is in all things. Is it different when given to the other or given to the self? What defines this difference? The question that remains is the love for the self negative when not used against others?
well, the choice is based on understanding, in that it involves working through the tangled morass of one's Experience, in an attempt to make sense of it.
learning can only occur through bringing light to experience, and being able to take a symbolic approach to events and happenings.
it's more than just being able to recognise patterns, its about being able to decipher experiences.
as Experience is processed (via the means of contemplation, examination, recontextualisation) one can take the viewpoint of either accepting the other-self, or controlling it - which is just another way of saying either accepting the self or controlling it - and so certain biases are formed.
those biases are how we respond to future experiences, and so there is most definitely a fork in the road.
The Choice is either continuing to open one's hand, in a gesture of goodwill or handshake, or to continue closing the hand into a fist, with which to strike and control others.
one is most definitely within one's rights to greet other selves with a handshake, and then close the hand into a fist the next day, as most beings have made both positive and negative polarizations in this lifetime.
but it is most definitely helpful to make an 'overall' choice or direction in which one wishes to polarise, lest the confusion of constant fluctuation and indecision tears the mind in two.
(03-19-2014, 05:18 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Love is in all things. Is it different when given to the other or given to the self? What defines this difference? The question that remains is the love for the self negative when not used against others?
The difference is between running water like a river and contained water such as a lake or pond. When love is kept solely for the self, it is done by adding the energy to deep red-orange-yellow distortions, the distortions thus used as the reservoir for the energy. Control is then gained by pushing to the blue-ray to use the co-creative nature for control, bypassing the heart center.
When love is shared with others then the heart opens up and the connecting forces which allow love to move between fields creates a flow up from the lower chakras to the blue-ray. Thus the individual is constantly being renewed and bathed in new energies, whereas the purely self oriented individual continues to amplify and compress the same energies and distortions at its core, even if new energy is drawn inwards.
Thus, to the water, or to the love, it is the same. The water is the water, the love is the love. However, water has many uses and many contexts. Sometimes it is free-flowing and sometimes it builds on stagnancy. It can become part of a pleasant stream or a decaying bog.
Thus, the difference then is circulation. Love that is circulated only within the self creates a vortex which will draw or absorb energy from others, even if energy is offered to tempt to control. This energy is circulated solely within the self and is used entirely to the designs of the individual's desires. Love that is circulated with others is returned amplified, and the energy is therefore added to not just each individual's system, but the sharing actually creates new systems and connections between the individuals, further energizing both.
It is pointless to attempt to discern polarity based on the access to the tool of polarization. That Love may be found anywhere is a positive point, and works towards positive polarization, because the negative would see love only for themselves.
One might suggest that one could love oneself and not others and polarize positively but I think this is distinctly improbable as positive polarization, based on radiation, is at its core a loving of other selves, and hence the difference of the activation of the heart center, or not.
There are two aspects of polarity: Polarity in respect to others and polarity in respect to self. I believe the latter aspect needs to be considered the must needs of an entity in order to serve without significant distortion and confusion. These aspects need to be considered with great forethought in regards to compassion in balance with self-respect.
This is my own belief/understanding.
(03-19-2014, 01:59 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ] (03-19-2014, 05:18 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Love is in all things. Is it different when given to the other or given to the self? What defines this difference? The question that remains is the love for the self negative when not used against others?
The difference is between running water like a river and contained water such as a lake or pond. When love is kept solely for the self, it is done by adding the energy to deep red-orange-yellow distortions, the distortions thus used as the reservoir for the energy. Control is then gained by pushing to the blue-ray to use the co-creative nature for control, bypassing the heart center.
When love is shared with others then the heart opens up and the connecting forces which allow love to move between fields creates a flow up from the lower chakras to the blue-ray. Thus the individual is constantly being renewed and bathed in new energies, whereas the purely self oriented individual continues to amplify and compress the same energies and distortions at its core, even if new energy is drawn inwards.
Thus, to the water, or to the love, it is the same. The water is the water, the love is the love. However, water has many uses and many contexts. Sometimes it is free-flowing and sometimes it builds on stagnancy. It can become part of a pleasant stream or a decaying bog.
Thus, the difference then is circulation. Love that is circulated only within the self creates a vortex which will draw or absorb energy from others, even if energy is offered to tempt to control. This energy is circulated solely within the self and is used entirely to the designs of the individual's desires. Love that is circulated with others is returned amplified, and the energy is therefore added to not just each individual's system, but the sharing actually creates new systems and connections between the individuals, further energizing both.
It is pointless to attempt to discern polarity based on the access to the tool of polarization. That Love may be found anywhere is a positive point, and works towards positive polarization, because the negative would see love only for themselves.
One might suggest that one could love oneself and not others and polarize positively but I think this is distinctly improbable as positive polarization, based on radiation, is at its core a loving of other selves, and hence the difference of the activation of the heart center, or not.
Your post confuses me a bit Tanner and gives rise to several questions which I would like to share:
- Is love, like water, a limited resource?
- Can love ever stagnate? Can it ever decay, even when kept within the self?
- Is compassion towards the self negatively polarizing? Is loving and accepting the self unconditionally a selfish act? Is forgiving and loving the self an act which depolarizes the lower chakras?
- How does one radiate love outwards?
- What would happen to an entity which radiates love outwards but has no love for the self?
- Is loving ever a disservice?
Feel free to share your own view
Were I to personally, opinionated-ly answer these questions: It is not limited in its potential existence, but has limited kinetic access based on ability to hold it within conscious awareness through faith and will.
Yes, it can stagnate and does decay but not in the normal sense of those terms. This is so because focus may shift in its direction and so where there is not a strong focus of awareness of a logos there is less bonding between parts of the self that hold the love.
No, compassion towards the self is neither positively or negatively polarizing, it is healing and balancing which aids one in polarization.
Also no, unconditional love for the self is not selfish, but very difficult in actual practice. Forgiving and loving the self, if genuine, would also lead to forgiveness of others as if the self is accepted fully then there is no need to influence others through grudges or anger. It is actually one of the keys to activation of the heart center I believe, and certainly does not depolarize or de-energize, if that's what you mean, the lower chakras however it may cause a reaction in regards to distortions in those centers and could perhaps assist in balancing other centers.
Radiating love outwards, I believe involves a connectivity with the idea of "outwards", of others and the capacity to interact in a way that is giving of energy which is love. In short, through seeking to give. This can be done in an enormous myriad of fashions. However, radiating love to others, while certainly an element, is but one aspect of what Ra calls being of service to others, I believe. Loving others is a service, but is not service itself, however I would say service to others naturally arises from and by a love for them.
Loving is never a disservice, no, for someone is always receiving service however different manners of expression which stem from that loving can result in other catalyst which may cause blockages in others or the self. All imo, of course.
Are not all things love; all matter, all ether, all light?
(03-19-2014, 03:26 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]There are two aspects of polarity: Polarity in respect to others and polarity in respect to self. I believe the latter aspect needs to be considered the must needs of an entity in order to serve without significant distortion and confusion. These aspects need to be considered with great forethought in regards to compassion in balance with self-respect.
This is my own belief/understanding.
This doesn't make any sense to me because I see it that self and other IS polarity. The polarization is just equalization of energy. Those who keep energy compressed within themselves and away from others are thus polarizing because they are taking a portion of the local energy and apportioning it to themselves in a disproportionate ratio with the others of the planetary sphere and thus gain negative polarization because they are gaining at the loss of others. The Creator is cut from the soul of the other and chained within the self. Whereas those who share and circulate their energy with others are polarizing because the more they share, the more is shared in return and the Creator sings together in all the hearts conjoined together.
Note that I believe polarization is a conscious process and does not happen in the sense of choice until it is conscious. One may polarize before being aware of the choice, but I do not think it is possible to harvest positive or negative without the choice being transmuted by decision in to conscious activity.
(03-20-2014, 05:11 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Are not all things love; all matter, all ether, all light?
The question is misleading, as love is not a substance, it is a focusing of will. Substance derives from the focus of the Creator upon the idea of the One Thought of Creation. To say all things are love is to call the tool that which is the project.
Also this quote seems relevant for some reason:
Quote:The Significator of the Spirit is that living entity which either radiates or absorbs the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator, radiates it to others or absorbs it for the self.
All roads lead home. So is there truly choice? Those who reject all are still in service as much as those who accept all. The choice from my perspective is to realize there is no choice and too simply be.
Edit for Mind Quad.
Tanner: Can a one infinite creator truly have a finite threshold as you speak? Why would a creation deem it proper to have energy distributed in a way that love could be kept from the other?
These are my thoughts on the subject.
Who do you want to be? Which road do you want to take? This is your Choice. Central to choosing who you want to be is the choice of how you want to treat other-selves in your relationships, thus polarization occurs. The polarity generated by this choice is what enables us to do work in the higher densities and it is in those densities where we refine and expand upon the self chosen in 3rd density. And naturally we are always given the choice to wander back to 3rd density and choose anew to explore other possibilities of self.
We are here in 3D to experiment and play with different configurations of self. The harvest Ra speaks of is the harvest of self by self which occurs near the end of this 3D game we play, where we sift through the collected experience stored in our violet ray and decide how to proceed.
These are just my musings on the Choice, by no means to I consider myself to be an authority on the subject
(03-20-2014, 11:27 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Tanner: Can a one infinite creator truly have a finite threshold as you speak? Why would a creation deem it proper to have energy distributed in a way that love could be kept from the other?
Free will through which the Creator experiences itself. All configurations are explored. Threshold is defined by relative unity with the whole.
The choice is about discovering who you truly are.
(03-18-2014, 05:00 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]I accept all-selves.
I reject all-selves.
That is all. In order to progress in this space/time continuum, you must make one of these choices and commit to it fully as a unified desire. To choose to make both choices in any capacity is to confuse the mind/body/spirit complex so far as to cause it to be without choice and without will.
This is The Choice as conveyed by my belief/understanding.
In terms of answering what choice is, with respect to the 3D architecture of the particular logos that we are part of, it
could simply be this (shaded portion) --
Quote:17.33 Questioner: Why is the negative path so much more difficult a path to attain harvestability upon than the positive?
Ra: I am Ra. This is due to a distortion of the Law of One which indicates that the gateway to intelligent infinity be a gateway at the end of a strait and narrow path as you may call it. To attain fifty-one percent dedication to the welfare of other-selves is as difficult as attaining a grade of five percent dedication to other-selves. The, shall we say, sinkhole of indifference is between those two.