03-18-2013, 09:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2013, 09:23 PM by JustLikeYou.)
Ankh, thanks for clarifying the concept of intention more closely to my own...intention :-)
In veiled 3D existence, many of us act with mistaken conceptions of our intentions because even these intentions are veiled. Hence, your example, zenmaster, is not useful in this particular question.
Intention (deep, genuine intention, not the intentions you may or may not perceive yourself to have within your more or less muddled awareness) is what distinguishes STO from STS. Effects are not important in the sense of the difference between the two. That does not mean that effects are not important at all. It only means that the effects of your actions are not what will signify whether you are STO or STS.
On the STO path, effects are only significant in terms of responsibility, a concept which is very important to STO. When an STO entity sees that its actions had an adverse effect, that entity will attempt to be of further service by balancing the effect. But the adverse effect in no way reduces the polarity of the entity. Only the intention can reduce your polarity. Only your decision -- in the moment of truth -- to intend service to self rather than service to others when you act will reduce your polarity. This is how intention is central.
On the STS path, however, effects are more important for polarization. When an STS entity attempts to enslave or somehow control another, the entity will lose polarity if the attempt fails. That is, seeing itself as weak, it will freely choose to serve the other in response (this service may only be giving up the attempt). The two paths are, of course, asymmetrical in this way: whereas STS polarity depends on the ability to control, STO polarity depends on the ability to accept. In acceptance, there is no dependency on the actions of others. You may accept others as they are and grant them perfect free will no matter what they do in response to your actions.
The means are important insofar as only certain means can be harmonized within the context of either STS or STO. However, I would say that the intention and the means tend to merge into one in the highly polarized entity. If my means of serving others is somehow violent or controlling, then it appears that I am not actually intending to serve them.
Consider the lessons of wisdom which 4D entities must learn. 4D entities tend to be naively fervent in their desire to serve. It is only through the hard catalyst of failure to be of service (i.e. unintended consequences) that the wisdom to abstain from interfering is learned. But, again, the unintended consequences in no way affect the polarity of the entity. In fact, my experience has been that unintended consequences polarize me more toward service. I tend to desperately want to correct the imbalance that I have created.
Wander-Man, the intentions of others are not at all easy to read. And this is a good thing: otherwise how would we learn to trust each other?
50.7
"your only indication of other-selves’ cards is to look into the eyes."
This is not a glimpse at the cards of the other-self. It is only an indication.
However, it is true that as you become more and more balanced, you can "read" the balances and intentions of others -- but even this skill is still not fool-proof. The whole point of 3D is that each other-self is a mystery, no matter how far you progress. Just today, I had to retract an assessment I had previously made about a friend. It was a pleasant surprise to find him to have greater integrity than I had thought.
In veiled 3D existence, many of us act with mistaken conceptions of our intentions because even these intentions are veiled. Hence, your example, zenmaster, is not useful in this particular question.
Intention (deep, genuine intention, not the intentions you may or may not perceive yourself to have within your more or less muddled awareness) is what distinguishes STO from STS. Effects are not important in the sense of the difference between the two. That does not mean that effects are not important at all. It only means that the effects of your actions are not what will signify whether you are STO or STS.
On the STO path, effects are only significant in terms of responsibility, a concept which is very important to STO. When an STO entity sees that its actions had an adverse effect, that entity will attempt to be of further service by balancing the effect. But the adverse effect in no way reduces the polarity of the entity. Only the intention can reduce your polarity. Only your decision -- in the moment of truth -- to intend service to self rather than service to others when you act will reduce your polarity. This is how intention is central.
On the STS path, however, effects are more important for polarization. When an STS entity attempts to enslave or somehow control another, the entity will lose polarity if the attempt fails. That is, seeing itself as weak, it will freely choose to serve the other in response (this service may only be giving up the attempt). The two paths are, of course, asymmetrical in this way: whereas STS polarity depends on the ability to control, STO polarity depends on the ability to accept. In acceptance, there is no dependency on the actions of others. You may accept others as they are and grant them perfect free will no matter what they do in response to your actions.
The means are important insofar as only certain means can be harmonized within the context of either STS or STO. However, I would say that the intention and the means tend to merge into one in the highly polarized entity. If my means of serving others is somehow violent or controlling, then it appears that I am not actually intending to serve them.
Consider the lessons of wisdom which 4D entities must learn. 4D entities tend to be naively fervent in their desire to serve. It is only through the hard catalyst of failure to be of service (i.e. unintended consequences) that the wisdom to abstain from interfering is learned. But, again, the unintended consequences in no way affect the polarity of the entity. In fact, my experience has been that unintended consequences polarize me more toward service. I tend to desperately want to correct the imbalance that I have created.
Wander-Man, the intentions of others are not at all easy to read. And this is a good thing: otherwise how would we learn to trust each other?
50.7
"your only indication of other-selves’ cards is to look into the eyes."
This is not a glimpse at the cards of the other-self. It is only an indication.
However, it is true that as you become more and more balanced, you can "read" the balances and intentions of others -- but even this skill is still not fool-proof. The whole point of 3D is that each other-self is a mystery, no matter how far you progress. Just today, I had to retract an assessment I had previously made about a friend. It was a pleasant surprise to find him to have greater integrity than I had thought.