[split] Knowing that you cannot know

[Patrick]

What does it say about our own heart when we are judging others to have no heart?

What does it say when you are judging that I am judging others to have no heart?

I shared a reflection to inspire introspection.

But to answer your question, judging others or I should say, pushing your personal judgment unto others, is an act of constriction.

It constricts the heart. I try to avoid that as much as I can.

[Diana]

For the example of the vaccine thread. Once it is recognized that there are two diametrically opposed viewpoints, then there is nothing else to discuss in between these two groups.

i don't know patrick.....

would this apply to individuals as well? as in, if someone says "patrick I disagree with your viewpoint" and you say "well I disagree with yours", then there's nothing to discuss, just by virtue of the fact that you disagree (on the surface at least)? that feels...... awful cold. like a stalemate.

I guess it depends on what the intents of the interlocutors are. But in many cases, I would say yes. It's just the old "we agree to disagree" in the spirit of keeping things harmonious.

Maybe you see it as cold because you imagine the parties reaching this "stalemate" at the slightest disagreement ?

But that is not what I am alluding to. You reach that state when all is said basically.

Continuing to argue after that point falls into the trying to convince category. You are no longer sharing your point of view per se.

Imagine, for example, two persons trying to understand each others, but they are not even willing to ascribe the same meaning to words. Are they even talking to each others then?

The Creation is not forcing entities to agree with each others, otherwise STS would not even exist.

Instead the natural state of things seems to be that groupings of like minded people gather together to seek more effectively.

It seems to me that the most loving and harmonious attitude is to do as Ra suggested.

"...In the case of those with whom you, as entities and as a group, are not in resonance, you wish them love, light, peace, joy, and bid them well..."

I think one can go beyond that, but it takes detachment.

One can, even though utterly disagreeing with an other, loosen the conviction of one's stance enough to "walk in the other's moccasins" so to speak, and try and see how or why the other landed on their perspective. This is not with the idea of changing one's mind, though this is an inherent possibility, but with an eye to expanding one's comprehension. 

If one is on a "side," I personally don't think it matters how much love and light one sends to the other side, as one is still in a divided position. I don't mean to denigrate the idea of sending love and light, just that it may be cancelled out by standing one's ground in a divided manner which reinforces separation.

To give one example:

Let's say you (no one in particular) don't like religions. But you can be fundamentally (pun intended ) against dogmatic and controlling religions, and talk to a Christian, a Muslim, or any person at all who has a dogmatic belief system about their philosophy without being harmed or sucked in by it even just out of curiosity, and in doing so, by reaching out in this way even to someone who is clinging to an archaic and even harmful system of beliefs, create a space of acceptance which helps the other and self. In addition, by opening up to the other's ideas in this way, you might get a larger picture of why this other is clinging to such.

One thing I do because I like to debate, is take the other side, one in which I am not familiar or aligned with. This is a very enlightening experience. 

[yossarian]

If one is on a "side," I personally don't think it matters how much love and light one sends to the other side, as one is still in a divided position. I don't mean to denigrate the idea of sending love and light, just that it may be cancelled out by standing one's ground in a divided manner which reinforces separation.

"Sending love and light" always sounds like it's from Harry Potter. You're inflicting or throwing or launching a missile at someone, with intent to achieve something

The concept of "sending love and light" is not the same as union or understanding, and "sending love" isn't the same as "feeling love" or showing love

[Patrick]

I understand how putting oneself in the other's shoes is beneficial to the seeker. I like to think I do this when presented with different point of views.

I am rather pondering more about what comes next?  Once you have done that and you got all you could from the other point of view?

The example given here is a bit extreme, because it talks about point of views so diametrically opposed, but I believe it still applies to our current discussion.

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.

This is in relationship with this other quote from Ra: "...No more than this can you do for your portion of the Creator is as it is and your experience and offering of experience, to be valuable, needs be more and more a perfect representation of who you truly are..."

There comes a point when all is said and done. Movement is no longer wished on any sides, if it was even wished to begin with.

--

If we accept that we cannot know then the "agree to disagree" is a fine solution, since we know that we cannot know the truth of our others. Everyone then recognizes the validity of the other point of views and closure can be achieved without consensus.

What if your other does not accept that we cannot know and continues to drill "the" Truth inside your mind?

That is akin to the thought-war Ra talks about. I am not interested in warring and it seems the Confederation is not interested in warring either. Yet they find themselves without a choice in order for their experience to remain valuable to the Creator. In this, STS is successful in abridging the freewill of the Confederation.

--

MOD NOTE

Posts discussing Bring4th principles were moved here:

https://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthre...?tid=19175

[unity100]

No matter how much information is gathered from veiled third density, the result is distorted. This is done on purpose so that we finally learn to release the attempt, in faith.

That's not correct in both levels:

3d entities do not release anything in 'faith'. They learn, even if subconsciously that, everything is one/united, and they choose an orientation towards that unity. Positive or negative. They dont 'release' anything in particular, nor there is any specific 'faith' that comes into play for 3d entities.

Religions and religious faith and what is derived as 'faith' from them are a specific phenomenon of this particular planet, especially the phenomenon of its very specific semitic population. Th concept of 'faith', 'believing' and 'trusting' scarcely appear in the religions or philosophies of most of historic and modern world other than semitic religions, which have a specific obsession with faith. Namely, faith in the holy book, faith in the person who wrote that holy book and over those, faith in the god which that person claims to represent. Which is a trait taken from Mesopotamian religions. Not found in others - Asian, Central and South American, African, Indian religions dont have such a 'faith' trapping. In most of them, it doesnt matter whether you believe in god or have faith in anything. And in semitic religions, this specifically comes with 'keeping the faith in god/religion in order to qualify for something or get something in return'. Which is in itself scarce in many other religions.

Similarly, other 3d planets are also not likely to repeat the same pattern - because it is a specific pattern even on this planet. Whether they have 'faith' in something or not, the mechanisms of yellow ray will work the same, including its eventual harvest - subconsciously understanding and/or consciously realizing that everything is one/united, and choosing a particular attitude towards that unity.

It doesnt matter whether they have 'faith' in the existence of that unity. It absolutely doesnt matter whether they say they 'believe' that that unity exists or not. They must recognize that everything is one/connected.

You say often that we are undergoing a test.

That's another trait of semitic religions - 'being tested on Earth for getting into X or receiving Y in afterlife'. It doesnt exist even in other religions.

Per Ra material, there is no 'test' either. You just realize that everything is connected, and then you develop a preferred attitude towards it.

...This is not a dimension of knowing, even subjectively, due to the lack of overview of cosmic and other inpourings which affect each and every situation which produces catalyst. The subjective acceptance of that which is at the moment and the finding of love within that moment is the greater freedom.

Entities are not expected to understand the mechanics and dynamics of unity of existence in 3d. That's what that knowing is. Its not even remotely possible with our current science and knowledge level. But they are expected to internally know/realize that everything is connected, and choose how to react to it.

It doesnt matter whether the realization comes subconsciously, it doesnt matter if it comes consciously, it does not matter whether the entity remembers that from its past lives by reading a channeled material like this on this planet. What matters is that the entity realizes it and chooses a response.

Consciously choosing to dumb down mind complex and leaving things into obscurantism and deferring responsibility for the burden by leaving all to 'faith' is not a good way for polarization. Its no different from the behavior of people who take all the teachings to heart while in the temples, who then forget all of it the moment they step outside the temple door - something which Ra criticizes.

[Patrick]

Faith: "complete trust or confidence in someone or something".

I am using the word faith as in having complete trust that the Universe knows better what's good for me. Whatever I try to come up with by myself will never be as good as if I let the Universe decide. What seems random to us is actually perfectly orchestrated. Why not ask to help manifest this perfect plan.

So regarding the law of attraction, instead of thinking that I know what's best for me and demanding that, I ask what is best for me (and all) without even trying to specify what that might be. I release that whole process in complete trust in the Universe.

This is completely optional of course. We are also here to experience all we desire after all. But then again, what we truly desire is veiled from us. So personally, I find it much simpler and best for all to ask the One to use me in the best possible manner possible. This will bring others and myself the most useful catalysts, while also bringing the most joy to all in the process.