4dphilosophyproject (at) gmail.com

If you have a serious interest in developing the IUP/AOP and producing a philosophical treatise and curriculum for mainstream university study send an email. Elaborate on what your goals are and what specific interests you may have related to this project.

Hello B4 researchers

I think this post fits best in the Strictly LOO forum since it's all about the philosophy of one -- monisms or oneness laws -- which tries to define Ra's LOO.

Monism -- The doctrine that reality consists of a single basic substance or element -- the doctrine that reality is one unitary organic whole with no independent parts. There are a wide variety of monisms which the LOO supporter will need to explore  -- plus an 'All is One' philosophy by Parmenides from this link is worth a view.     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjTAWFNLjKc

Just as a side note: I've since thought up an equivalent alternative to the IUP or Infinity Unity Principle which is the AOP or All One Principle which allows for flexible usage and applications when doing philosophical derivations. IUP = IU + UI is equivalent to AOP = AO + OA where both have their strengths of usage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is part of a letter I wrote to a philosophy student in October 2014 who had shown some interest in reviewing the Ra Material. He sent me an article and this is my reply with some added definitions of teleology and normative for the B4 reader.

In this letter I speculate that the Law of One is a meta-monism that correlates specific types of monisms or oneness laws with the stages of evolution through the densities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reading the article you sent, Monism: The Priority of the Whole by Jonathan Schaffer, it prompted some ideas on how to frame the Law of One monism in comparison to other monisms.  Law of One seems to be a meta-monism which suggests an inclusive and teleological system of monisms beginning and ending with Existence Monism.

Teleology is expressed from a statement in the Ra Material that "the Creator desires to know and experience itself" and does this in an infinite number of ways. This may actually be its one and only intention and so is both first and final cause.

teleology -- a doctrine explaining phenomena by their ends or purposes -- connotes a striving or effortful attempt to attain a goal

normative -- prescriptive -- pertaining to giving directives or rules -- decreed laws or principles -- the striving nature of teleology has a normative connotation

The term teleology suggests a relation to the normative terms law and principle so that the Law of One may be an appropriate expression. A perhaps more philosophically cogent expression is the Infinity/Unity Principle (IUP) by which infinity is defined as a unity.  This self-referential notion of IUP allows for identity and predication to derive expressions ie 'All is All', 'All is One', 'One is One', 'One is All'.
 
Following these, dialectical expressions ie 'not-All is not-One' can be derived to be followed by quantification and other complex logics.

Back to the Law of One.

Here's a rough draft of what meta-monism might mean as it relates to the Ra Material. There's much room for revision. Additionally, Shaffer's Priority Monism also may be a meta-monism concept since it is outside the substance version of monisms and appears to be a less complete and weaker version of the Law of One meta-monism.

Here's my preliminary idea of the cycle of monism stages which a meta-monism
encompasses:

Note: previous stages coexists with and continue to modify later stages

Differentiation Phase

1. Existence monism -- static/nondual -- primal oneness
2. Dialectical monism -- dynamic/dual, bipolar metaphysics, space/time and time/space  
3. Organic monism -- dynamic/finite plural, biology, complex organic systems
4. Complex monism -- early 3D -- dynamic/infinite plural, extreme complexity and emergence of self-aware beings caused by separation/blockage effects leading to conflict, tension, confusion, questioning, an ethical split of STO/STS or good/evil, free will and ethical choice

Integration Phase

5. Higher order Complex monism -- later 3D -- one chooses between STO and STS
6. Higher order Organic monism -- conscious beings form organic structures called social memory complexes or collectives
7. Higher order Dialectical monism -- all polarities seek to unify, the fusion experience
8. Higher order Existence monism -- total fusion, incubation phase leading to next cycle
 
In stage 4 separation consciousness causes the ethical and evolutionary split.

STO -- service to others/outward directed -- is where a part of the whole views other parts as other-selves, the self serves other-selves, positive intention and action and notion of good -- the bias is towards monism.

STS -- service to self/inward directed -- is where a part of the whole serves itself and does not view other parts as other-selves -- negative intention and action and notion of evil -- the bias is towards pluralism.

This ethical polarity needs further research since moderate STS has good qualities ie for survival and self-determination and extreme STO can be unwise ie martydom.

This ethical dichotomy is very complex in that we all incorporate STO and STS in various portions which leads to complex emotions and psychological states as we assert our will and intention to know ourselves and others. That is one reason for characterizing a human being as a mind/body/spirit complex.

New philosophical notion for the philosophy student.
When expressed as a polarity, ethics is in some ways quantifiable with the following values necessary to evolve to stage 6:
> 50% STO
> 95% STS

Notice the disparity between percentages which points to the natural monism bias of creation to have connection and harmony between parts.
 
An unpolarized electric battery has no charge and cannot perform work.
Similarly, an unpolarized person is unmotivated and weak and does not
perform work in consciousness.

So ethical polarity is fundamental for the evolution of humans and other sentient beings.

I think we all remember as kids how we could frustrate the heck out of someone by answering a question with a question.  It was a deliberate ploy to annoy them, especially if they were sincere about knowing the answer, and they knew that you knew the answer.

But it is also a valid means of dialogue, if used appropriately.  Sometimes a question indicates a lack of thoughtfulness, and perhaps isn't structured in a way that can yield an answer that the person can actually use.  By reflecting back to them a question, it may be the swiftest means to help them to think about something more deeply, before querying further.

Ra did this on a few occasions:

Quote:57.29 Questioner: How did this learning process take place in— learning or teaching— take place in the pyramid?

Ra: I am Ra. How does teach/learning and learn/teaching ever take place?

Quote:44.6 Questioner: Is there a reason that I am open to these signals of a negative nature?

Ra: I am Ra. Are you not all things?

the following is more of a hypothetical, as Ra admits that it almost never happens.  But the philosophical implications are just too juicy *not* to consider.  This is the sentence in question:

Quote:Similarly, a mistaken Orion contact with highly polarized positive entities can wreak havoc with Orion troops unless these Crusaders are able to depolarize the entity mistakenly contacted. This occurrence is almost unheard of. Therefore, the Orion group prefers to make physical contact only with the weaker-minded entity.

Quote:"55.5 Questioner: You mentioned that this will work when the bidding is properly done. What did you mean by “when the bidding is properly done?”

Ra: I am Ra. To properly bid is to be properly negative. The percentage of thought and behavior involving service to self must approach 99% in order for a third-density negative entity to be properly configured for such a contest of bidding."

(pre-edit: I've bolded the main parts of interest for anyone who wants to skip the long-winded comparisons to further help understand this concept)

I've done a lot of thinking for a while on Polarity.  I understand it perfectly enough (for now personally) from a Unity standpoint.  The problem is not Polarity in my mind, but how we perceive it.  We call it Service to Self and Service to Others.

It's not a mantle to pick up in my mind, even if it can be referred to as such through colloquial metaphor or normal metaphor.  Service to Self and Service to others aren't even two sides of the same coin for me.  It's the same things, the exact same things with different views added on.  The understanding of Service to Self individuals in the Ra Material accidentally paints, by an Service to Self Entity itself, a strongly negative view of how they operate.  Similarly it seems there's this biased view of what being Service to Others entails.  Polarity belongs to All in the sense of this density.  Which I will try to focus solely on, and not the 4th-7th Densities.

Here we make a choice, and here there is no wrong except that which we think is wrong, of which, it is not truly wrong.  The only Truly Wrong aspect is Wrong itself.  This can't be stressed, and perhaps exceptions exist but considering existence was around before Creation, I'm not entirely sure you can call anything actually truly wrong even if it...Say, disintegrates Creation itself? (Nukes, which Ra even directly says aren't wrong by referring to them as another aspect of the One)  But here, in 3D.  There is a wrong.  And there is a right.  It's personal for everyone, and society often times ignores both ends of the spectrum, and also often times doesn't.  It just depends on your perspective, and on your view, as in, your view of Reality.

So then we have Service to Self beings who get to know themselves, then react the way they choose to react.
So then we have Service to Others beings who get to know themselves, then react the way they choose to react.

Then there's intermediary actions that both can take that are not actually that different, but closer to being similar in that they're the exact opposites.

One chooses to Love Self and Extend Love
One chooses to Love Self and Extend Control

One chooses to say what is and isn't best.
One chooses to say anything is worthy.

So the true issue arises when these different but same polarities meet.  Ra explains how this is resolved in the case of a Service to Self Entity that utilizes Death and Pain against a Service to Others Entity that desires to Love All Unconditionally (technically Carla, Jim, and Don in this case which balances out, as also said by Ra.)

So now we understand the concept of potentially highly dangerous magical entities that can indirectly assault you.  This typically is not how it works I think personally, considering the Ra Contact was in itself a highly unusual situation of harmony in itself, it called for highly unusual circumstances to deal with the situation.  This case was a being who used underlings, then went in itself.

So now there's the bias out there, it's pretty easy to see such a traumatic occurrence as attempted murder and then immediately identity it with all Service to Self Entities.  The same can be said of such horrors perceived by anyone who can link them to a genre or group.  Racism exists this way.  Sexism does too.  So in this case, I think we have a beautifully funny case of Spiritualityism where a group believes erroneously that another similar group is worse than it actually is and has attributes they do not. (Which, Sexism and Racism do too, interesting how that works...)

So then in my mind, it's not about polarity, it's about intention and identity.  We're all human.  I did a lot of thinking about my choice and polarity and discovered I do legitimately and genuinely care for basically the whole of Humanity and Earth, right down to the horror and madness, but typically find myself too tired to be able to figure out how to handle it all, all the time.

So I want to offer to the people of the Law of One philosophy a conceptual orientation I'm trying to figure out in my head.  Service to All, or Service to the Creator.  Which might sound redundant or essentially Service to Others oriented, but in a way that tries to understand the fact that service to the creator is not all good and bad, but mostly just endlessly loved regardless of what is offered, or experienced.  Which means the horror is all there to teach us how to better love.

So thus I am left with a desire to try and...Fix up, even if just a little, this semantic issue of Service to Others versus Service to Self.  I think at the level most of us are at in our incarnations, we will never have to worry about something like an unseen magical entity indirectly trying to murder us for being of Service to Others.  I think some of us may experience very keen and prominent greetings, but I also believe and feel that the overall light regarding greetings is incorrectly aimed at blaming something for the greeting through treating it like it's a disservice by trying to thank it in response.

I find if we actually accept greetings as a service (for the sake of clarity, accepting greetings does not mean taking them up and letting them do something like jeopardize you), and view them as coming from ourselves regardless, we are being serviced in a positive light by a negative entity.  It has offered us a catalyst, and as entities that have taken up the race, we respond with love which effectively polarizes us, which is neutralized by the not accepting another's service, but only if it is a literal full decline of the catalyst, if the catalyst provided still occurs, service has still been done, and responding will still polarize one in the appropriate manner.  And if the service isn't declined, you've polarized.  Service was given through a perceived disservice.  This is why anyone perceiving greetings of psychic thoughts being planted (thoughts you perceive as not your own) or emotions being triggered (anger, paranoia, fear, sadness, to name a few), you can polarize seemingly alone by responding to such thoughts and emotions with love and forgiveness towards All (self and perceived other) rather than further negativity (thinking that is wrong, I don't want to think that.)  Remove all negative connotations, then the negative gradually fades for the true nature of things.  All Is As It Should Be, negative or positive, at this very moment, it is as it should be, needs to be, will be.  It can be negative, and even bad, but not wrong.

Similarly to continue the explanation, Service to Others often times may allow Service to Self people to polarize, by manipulating them in a way that they may never notice.  A Service to Self oriented person who has a Service to Others oriented friend may find their friendship despite being at odds spiritually, will still allow for polarization.

The two paths aren't separate, some of you know this and make a point to mention the interesting occurrences that each path does mirror each other, almost as if reciprocally.

So thus I come to My Choice.  I am of Service to All Others, to the extent I am able to be of Service without jeopardizing myself or others now or in the future.

I see Service to Self people who need love no different from anyone else, who I would willingly let manipulate me here and there to aid them, if they'd accept my service in return without ever manipulating me in a cruel or overtly harmful way.  However, I also understand that those people who are of Service to Self aiming for graduation do have to take up some mean ways of interacting with people in order to attain 95%.  At those levels, I understand that such ties would need to be severed possibly for their sake if they don't desire to treat you badly (which, honestly, is pretty thoughtful.)

Here's where I might lose some people.

What if instead of severing those ties, I maintained that they have the free will to perform their actions, and that I would accept such action as long as it does not jeopardize myself or others now or in the future, and stick around purposefully allowing them to polarize off of me while they indifferently allow me to do the same thing towards them by being kindly towards them?

If the Service to Self entity does not desire harmful ways to polarize, are they really...Bad?  Don't not bad people do bad things?  Does that make them overall bad?
Similarly, could someone of Service to Others actually be more selfish than selfless, be...Worse than another who is Service to Self?

Being of Service to All means remembering the Infinite Creator is All.  You cannot disservice the Infinite Creator in a sense of absolutely.  It is the same responsibility we all have, to attempt to do as we desire (If anyone disagrees with this, I encourage you to please say so and why so I can attempt to adjust my explanation until I have a real viable core concept).  To service ones self is to service the creator.  To service another is to service the creator.  To disservice one's self is still service to the creator.  To disservice another is still a service to the creator.

The Polarity aspect is what adds the intention behind it all.  Disservice pointlessly is in a sense a less viable service than a disservice that teaches another.  A disservice to the self is the same way, it's not as viable if it seems pointless, but is very much a service if it provides teaching or learning.

So with polarity in mind, this could work both ways.  On the one end a Service to Self person would still perform what they needed to do to polarize up to 95%, while being indifferent towards a friend who is polarizing positively by being unconditional in their lovingness towards the Service to Self person, as well as allowing them to manipulate to an agreed extent the Service to Others person.  So both can polarize off of each other in a harmonious way that allows each to get to graduation.  (inb4 the STS entity screws the STO in order to graduate...Though that'd make a great plot point in a book, and could still allow the STO entity to graduate if it forgave the other genuinely.)

It'd be even better if the Service to Self person was able to be friendly towards the Service to Others' person in a way that still allowed them to get something out of it in a polarizing way.  An example could be a business owner STS person helping out his STO friend who is in need for whatever reason, and in so doing accrues attention that the STS person can use to further their business to further their goals to further their polarization.

On the flip end, the Service to Others person need simply provide forgiveness and love to their shop owner STS buddy for helping them but only for their benefit. (which is why I say forgive), and in the process has polarized by simply doing so.

Can't there be a third way to graduate, a way for All?  A...Better Way for Humanity?  That allows us to see all things for what they really are.  A chance to be of Service to the Infinite Creator?  But more importantly, allows us to treat each other the way we really should consider more often.  Aiding endlessly without even meaning to.  A set up that leads to automatic harmonious polarization on both ends...

Or maybe this is all just wishful thinking for another Universe in another time.  I don't know, but I perceived many, many issues with both Service to Others and Service to Self paths that left me with questions without answers regarding unity and cooperation between entities of opposing Orientation's and how this seemingly odd stalemate could be...efficient without being...  Painful or traumatic.

If it sounds viable, or considerable at the least...Could ya'll please provide some feedback, comments or Constructive Criticism?

As a final note: I felt this was more appropriate in the Law of One forum rather than the Olio forum since it's a discussion on the mechanics of the two paths of polarity, and is looking for ways to blend the two together into a Path that considers the whole spectrum rather than one side of the spectrum. (That being STS confined and STO confined mentalities).

This OP is inspired by something andreazzi mentioned on another thread about reality being polarity based. I know that Ra mentions that the previous octave was about the mover and the moved. And Tan.rar (as Yggdrasil) mentioned that he believes that this octave that we are in is the green ray octave. So it made me wonder if there was an octave that refined the idea of time/space and space/time.

So this octave is, apparently, the green ray octave. The mover/moved octave is the yellow ray octave. The time/space, space/time would be either the orange ray octave or the red ray octave. Or could the mover/moved octave be the same as the time/space octave, since movement implies time? I don't know, it's kind of confusing.

I'd like to know what everyone's thoughts are.

I am creating this thread to open the door to an intelligent discussion on the implications and morality of owning a gun in relation to self preservation and/or preservation of loved ones. Here we have a few quotes from Ra that are tied into the topic. I know we all desire to live in a world where there are no guns and no violence. Given that we do, however, live in a world where there are those wishing to do harm I feel this is a relevant (and very sensitive) topic worth discussing. 


"33.11 Questioner: This motion picture brought out this point of which we have been talking. And the entity, the Colonel, had to make a decision at that point. I was just wondering, with respect to polarity, his polarization. He could have either knuckled under, you might say, to the negative forces, but he chose to defend his friend instead. Is it possible for you to estimate which is more positively polarizing: to defend the positively oriented entity, or to allow the suppression by the negatively oriented entities? Can you answer this even?

Ra: I am Ra. This question takes in the scope of fourth density as well as your own and its answer may best be seen by the action of the entity called Jehoshua, which you call Jesus. This entity was to be defended by its friends. The entity reminded its friends to put away the sword. This entity then delivered itself to be put to the physical death. The impulse to protect the loved other-self is one which persists through the fourth density, a density abounding in compassion. More than this we cannot and need not say."



"25.5 Questioner: You spoke of an Orion Confederation and a battle being fought between the Confederation and the Orion Confederation. Is it possible to convey any concept of how this battle is fought?

Ra: I am Ra. Picture, if you will, your mind. Picture it then in total unity with all other minds of your society. You are then single-minded and that which is a weak electrical charge in your physical illusion is now an enormously powerful machine whereby thoughts may be projected as things.

In this endeavor the Orion group charges or attacks the Confederation arms with light. The result, a stand-off, as you would call it, both energies being somewhat depleted by this and needing to regroup; the negative depleted through failure to manipulate, the positive depleted through failure to accept that which is given."



[font=sans-serif]"25.6 Questioner: Could you amplify the meaning of what you said by “failure to accept that which is given?”

Ra: I am Ra. At the level of time/space at which this takes place in the form of what you may call thought-war, the most accepting and loving energy would be to so love those who wished to manipulate that those entities were surrounded, engulfed, and transformed by positive energies.

This, however, being a battle of equals, the Confederation is aware that it cannot, on equal footing, allow itself to be manipulated in order to remain purely positive, for then though pure it would not be of any consequence, having been placed by the so-called powers of darkness under the heel, as you may say.

It is thus that those who deal with this thought-war must be defensive rather than accepting in order to preserve their usefulness in service to others. Thusly, they cannot accept fully what the Orion Confederation wishes to give, that being enslavement. Thusly, some polarity is lost due to this friction and both sides, if you will, must then regroup.

It has not been fruitful for either side. The only consequence which has been helpful is a balancing of the energies available to this planet so that these energies have less necessity to be balanced in this space/time, thus lessening the chances of planetary annihilation."
[/font]


[font=sans-serif]I am aware that there are many here who are against guns in general; Lets consider something. You are faced with a situation where you can either accept the gift of destruction of yourself and/or your loved one or you can eliminate/disable the entity desiring to cause destruction. [/font]



[font=sans-serif]What do you do and why?[/font]



[font=sans-serif]I am also wondering if there are any gun owners on the forum, and if so, I am interested in your perspective.[/font]




[font=sans-serif]Me, personally. I choose to not accept the gift of destruction. I do not, however, own a gun but it is something I have considered in my past.[/font]



[font=sans-serif]Thoughts?[/font]

-----

Here's part of 4.14..I'm interested in the word part of it:

"Therefore, those of the first type, those who seek to serve and are willing to be trained in thought, word, and action are those who will be able to comfortably maintain the distortion towards service in the area of healing."

Since the ".. mind, body, and spirit are inextricably intertwined and cannot continue, one without the other.", I think it's little considered how the simplest of statements can cause all sorts of distortion, which brings up the idea of be trained in word. So I think it's important that when we speak, we speak in a positive manner about things. I do my best to be joyful and share an uplifting positive outlook on things. It also makes sense that if words are vibration containing thought which carries with it a particular type of energy, the very words we speak must have a magical effect on reality.

About a year ago I realized that there was an area in which I wasn't walking in unity as best as I could, and that had to do with the words I was speaking. Most examples were small such as venting about coworkers, but others had to do with larger issues such as politics, social issues etc. Have you ever noticed how easily it is to just speak negatively of things, even when you're aware of the unity? It can sometimes take a lot of discipline to not indulge in such a mindset.

When others would bring up a particular issue, however large or small, if I would respond with separative words they would naturally latch onto that mindset. I realized that when I would refrain from speaking in such a manner at all, disharmonious conversation that was quite typical began to fade away, or particular catalyst would manifest itself to offer a lesson. I think this is because if you listen to conversation, people are mostly looking for validation of their thoughts.

The tricky issue here is that since there is no right or wrong, their thoughts are entirely ok and the goal is to see yourself in the other, yet you might not necessarily want the distortion to run wild so to speak. So since "The first giving beyond green ray is the giving of acceptance or freedom, thus allowing the recipient of blue-ray energy transfer the opportunity for a feeling of being accepted, thus freeing that other-self to express itself to the giver of this ray." ..I kindly acknowledge their confusion and say little if anything at all and just sort of let their observations rest within themselves.

So most importantly, I prefer to not see myself as a guiding teacher. I approach this aspect of service from the context wherein I am seeing myself in the situation and learning how to best respond in unity..learning how to best give what is being asked of me..discipline of the personality. So when I hear what feels to be separative energy, I see it as a challenge to do my own seeking and see myself, and to respond with compassion and acceptance.

For those who don't know the quote, venting and reacting to catalyst is important of course.. "The key to balance may then be seen in the unstudied, spontaneous, and honest response of entities toward experiences, thus using experience to the utmost, then applying the balancing exercises and achieving the proper attitude for the most purified spectrum of energy center manifestation in violet ray."

I also don't intend that all of this has to be serious business and stuffy. I tend to try and diffuse such situations with playfulness and humor.

-----

Love/Light is Directed by Free Will.  Which is directed by the One.  Which is all encompassed and infinitely experienced within infinity, unified by reference of infinity.

I laid out in my mind a branched chart.  At the core is the One, the One consciously directs its Free Will, which has the power to direct Love/Light, or manifest Love/Light in another sense.  In another-other sense it may also mean that anyone can (stand-alone) manifest using their Free Will.  An example is someone using knowledge of the Archetypical Mind and Free Will to direct how their catalyst comes and goes which in essence is them manifesting a situation, or manifesting Love/Light, essentially creating/directing their life partially along the way consciously.

I know I may be offering a rather huge distortion of how we can take the progression of creation starting from the Law of One and following its Primal Distortions of Free Will then Love then Light in a metaphorical sense as a direct way of communicating unconsciously that it starts with us as the One, we need to use our Free Will, to direct Love, and Light.

How does one be the Creator after surrendering themselves to the Creator?  By using their Free Will to direct Love and Light.

Which in my mind ends up connecting us with the One Infinite Creator in a logical sense of the story also telling us that as for the One Infinite so too do the many Infinite Ones have available to them the whole of the whole.

If that makes any sense...Maybe I'm looking too far into it, but I'm always drawn to this very beginning sequence of events, and how and why they occurred the way they did, and all I seem to come to the conclusion is it is the best sequence to occur at any point infinitely.  At no point does consciousness get referenced, even nonself-conscious entities have Free Will.  Even just experiencing entities have Free Will, the free will to be and experience primaly perhaps for more non-intelligent or  unaware entities.  Free Will allows one to manifest Love and Light, in the sense of expanding and formulating/constructing.  Whether it be the self for a growing plant, the creation of a family by an animal, or a life changing experience by a human.  The Free Will allows for the direction of the formulation/construction of an ever-expanding experience that is in itself Love.

Free Will itself being directed by the One, regardless of which One.

Any thoughts on this?