Worship?

[MonadicSpectrum]

That makes sense, IndigoSalvia. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I think resonance is a great word to describe the value of information to each individual because it emphasizes the subjective nature of value depending on the context of each individual. Perhaps if one finds and utilizes the information that most resonates with oneself, this is the fastest path to increasing capability and intelligence even if the information isn't true in the ultimate sense of the word; it can still be the best stepping stone available to the individual in the direction of truth.

I think this can also bring in a broader sense of accepting others without judgement to believe what they want even if we think it is false or unhelpful because we often lack the full context and perspective of that individual.

[IndigoSalvia]

I think resonance is a great word to describe the value of information to each individual because it emphasizes the subjective nature of value depending on the context of each individual. Perhaps if one finds and utilizes the information that most resonates with oneself, this is the fastest path to increasing capability and intelligence even if the information isn't true in the ultimate sense of the word; it can still be the best stepping stone available to the individual in the direction of truth.

I think this can also bring in a broader sense of accepting others without judgement to believe what they want even if we think it is false or unhelpful because we often lack the full context and perspective of that individual.

When I first posted the question, a simple question was in my head. After reading all of the perspectives, a subtly different question had taken shape with many, unique answers, as well as shared themes. 

MonadicSpectrum, I agree: acceptance for self/other/our One-ness.

[Diana]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I agree that it is best for each individual to seek to make choices for themselves. However, I have found that this may be easy to say for those who are born with a certain level of intelligence or capability, but I've also met people who genuinely struggle to understand reality and make effective choices. They often find that following leaders or group consensus is a better approximation of the right choice rather than following their own understanding. Unfortunately, this makes them easy targets for manipulation, but I can understand how such a system makes sense if one struggles to understand reality.

For these kinds of people, I could see it as making sense for building a simplified system of knowledge and reasoning that could be formulated as a religion for providing guidance on decision making and behavior for those who don't know how to determine that individually. For example, understanding densities, polarities, and harvests is non-trivial without extensive study and spiritual exploration to validate the truth of these ideas. Breaking it down into terms such as God, sin, forgiveness, faith, heaven, and hell can be easier approximations to understand and just as effective at guiding one to polarize positively enough for harvest. It is not necessary to have knowledge of unity or the Law of One for harvest, and I believe harvest is the main goal of any entity incarnating in third density and often a more realistic goal than becoming an adept or learning the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

We can also leverage existing belief systems to help others polarize in the direction of their choice without appearing as a 'threat' to their sacred beliefs by accepting the parts of their beliefs that contain abstract truths. For example, I identify as a Mystical Christian and encourage other Christians to go vegan because factory farming is harming God's creatures, and most Christians agree because they believe that it is our responsibility to be good stewards of the Earth and protect all of the creatures and environment.

All that said, I agree most religions become less effective when they claim supreme correctness and eternal damnation for anyone who disagrees with their theology or dismissing any idea that contradicts sacred scripture. They also become less effective when people use the religion for purposes of control rather than guidance. But my main point is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater because I believe it is possible to use religion to help people especially those who have less capability to understand reality or who are 'married' to their particular religious distortions.

Are these thoughts helpful for your consideration? I'd appreciate to hear your thoughts in response if it is your desire to share them.

Yes, your thoughts are absolutely worth consideration. You make a good point, and it shows me how easy it is for me to judge others. It's very true that not everyone has the same critical thinking capacity or ability to think things out. I actually do what you described when conversing with Christians or other religious or very biased or indoctrinated people—that is, I meet them on their own ground and honor their mindsets. I don't do this to condescend, which may sound counter to my earlier comments, I do it out of honoring the other person's mindset and unique journey. So I appreciate you making the points you have made.

When I come here to comment, my approach is different. I make some assumptions, such as, members here have read at least some of the Ra material. If they have, I then assume they in fact do have the critical thinking skills if they were able to get through the material. It is pretty dense thanks to Don's ability to comprehend Ra and ask intelligent questions. So I feel it is a proper platform to speak authentically without tailoring my comments to the degree I do with most people. I feel that I may come here and speak in generalities about Earth and the life on it. In my personal life, it is extremely rare that I talk about anything which may confront a person's beliefs.

My general life perspective is almost always global; in other words, I don't think all that much about personal relationships or lives, I tend to think about the world and all the life on it. My career even is predicated on this. When I say the human species needs to evolve, it is this global, planet Earth, view that drives my thinking. We are at a point in human history where we are massively destroying life and have the ability to do catastrophic damage due to our technology. The general consciousness of humankind is out of sync with this technology in my opinion. It leaves me with little patience for individual needs when the whole planet (including all the individuals) is threatened. I simply can't feel good about honoring the thinking that kills, maims, and destroys (all life not only human) in wars for example—and this includes those who can't really think for themselves and just follow the governments out of "patriotism" or xenophobia. On the other hand, it is what it is, and while I generally do not get "caught up in the maelstrom" I don't ignore it either.

My hope is that enough people will outgrow the need for outside authority to guide the way. 

Addressing another note, I don't care about harvest. I may leave this life and see it from another perspective, but down here in the trenches under the veil I think it was a bad idea to veil this density just because entities weren't evolving fast enough. It is very hard to see the suffering that results from it. And to what end? To serve the Creator? I don't see why a timeless, infinite source would care whether a M/B/S entity took thousands of or a trillion years to advance. Just my current thinking on that matter. The harvest will be what it will be. The complication of the veil I think is what has prevented "successful" harvests in the past. It also seems counter to free will. But since I am under a cosmic veil, my musings on this subject are likely as ignorant as the mindsets of those who follow religions blindly. 

And yet, it is fun to canvass perhaps unknowable things even if we find ourselves laughing at ourselves when we are on the other side of that veil. 

[IndigoSalvia]

Addressing another note, I don't care about harvest. I may leave this life and see it from another perspective, but down here in the trenches under the veil I think it was a bad idea to veil this density just because entities weren't evolving fast enough. It is very hard to see the suffering that results from it. And to what end? To serve the Creator? I don't see why a timeless, infinite source would care whether a M/B/S entity took thousands of or a trillion years to advance. Just my current thinking on that matter. The harvest will be what it will be. The complication of the veil I think is what has prevented "successful" harvests in the past. It also seems counter to free will. But since I am under a cosmic veil, my musings on this subject are likely as ignorant as the mindsets of those who follow religions blindly. 

And yet, it is fun to canvass perhaps unknowable things even if we find ourselves laughing at ourselves when we are on the other side of that veil. 

After reading pre- and post-veil, I developed questions about the purpose (cosmic costs/benefits ... ha ha) of the veil, as well. I understand Ra's explanation, but ... 

As you aptly point out, my thoughts are still those of a 3D entity under a veil. Perhaps the Logos will revise the veil after this octave? 

To placate my nagging questions, I back my perspective way out and remind myself that we, the 1ICC (one/infinite creator/creation), are knowing ourselves (in infinite ways), meandering to and fro, and slowly gravitating toward one end of the spectrum, or the other. It doesn't placate my MBS entirely, because I still feel suffering on this planet intensely. I try to balance my hyper-compassion with heart-wisdom. 

The collective that we are - the 1ICC - is still refining itself. For some reason, this is comforting to me. 

I would not say that my 3D eyes are solely fixed on the prize (harvest), either. I see my work as being a 3D emissary to my self/whole (soul stream). We each determine how best to do that, given our pre-incarnative and incarnative choices. That's a hard thing for me to hold given the myriad choices that we 3D entities make (very much including myself here). 

I try to gaze into the collective heart, and underneath all of the 3D "noise." When I smile or help people, and receive the same from others, it serves as a reminder of what Ra said: it just seems that humans are more STS than STO. I speculate that separation, division, control, etc. (STS) gets more airtime than the compassion, sharing, generosity of spirit, etc. (STO). And, maybe that's okay in a sense, maybe that's the mirror that we need to continue to make choices.

[MonadicSpectrum]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Diana.

Your perspective makes sense to me. I agree it is important to think critically about traditional systems of belief and consider how they affect the whole world even if it can be perceived as offensive to some, and I think your thoughts are welcome on a forum such as this for consideration by others. I also completely agree that human consciousness isn't keeping pace with our technology which can be dangerous for our collective future. I think Atlantis and Maldek are great examples that show how easily a civilization can destroy itself when technology surpasses the wisdom and compassion to use the technology properly.

I just foresee the best way to help us advance our consciousness is by building on our existing religious foundations by eliminating elements in religions that lead to control of others, killing, maiming, xenophobia, and destruction while keeping the elements that lead to love, peace, harmony, joy, unity, and self-control. I see this evolutionary religious path as distinct from a path that seeks to eliminate religion from society.

Regarding the concept of harvest, I think it is helpful to try to view it from the perspective of our other-selves who are the 'gardeners' who are responsible for guiding the evolution of life on Earth. Let's look at their perspective both without a veil and with a veil in the context of the 'gardeners' being the owners of a video game. These are just my thoughts on the matter so please take what resonates and leave the rest.

Without a veil, all the players of the game are aware that they are just players in the game as well as the owners of the game. Because of this knowledge, the players just enjoy playing the game doing random actions without consideration of consequences or learning to play the game better because while in the player perspective they see no significant reason to put in the effect required to learn. However, when they return to the gardener perspective in between game lives, they realize that the game is changing very, very slowly and it's not that exciting or interesting to actually keep playing. While reality might be infinite, watching the game from the gardener's perspective and playing the same game from the player's perspective for trillions of years makes it lose any excitement or interest. It would be kind of like watching the same movie over and over with very small changes such as a one word difference each time. And because the only way to advance the game to the next stage which unlocks a series of new exciting and fun experiences is for the players of the game to learn enough to handle these new experiences, the gardeners decided to reframe the perspective of the players to not remember that they are playing a game or that they are also the owners of the game.

Now, the players began learning much faster to play the game better because they felt suffering when they failed to learn and also didn't know that the game could last forever. Believing the player itself to be finite, the players started trying to fit many more new experiences and lessons into one game life becoming much more capable to handle new experiences. This was viewed as a great improvement over the small, boring changes that were occurring before. However, a problem began to originate when the veil was experimented with blocking too much information from the players. The players began suffering too much even to the point where they stopped learning. Now, it was worse than before... not only are the players not learning enough to advance to new, exciting experiences in the next stage of the game, but they are now having long, extended periods of pain instead of just merely boring experiences. In future iterations of the game, it is likely that the veil will not be as thick but somewhere in between with a better balance between suffering and learning.

However, the existing players of the game who were suffering could be destroyed and recycled to end their suffering (similar to Noah's flood), but it was decided by the gardeners that it would be best to attempt to 'save' or help as many of those suffering players as possible to learn to escape the suffering and advance to the next stage of the game where there is no more suffering. To help accomplish this task of saving as many players as possible, help was called in from other gardeners and players from other games (even from more advanced stages of games) to choose to become players in this suffering game to learn how to escape the suffering and teach the existing players to escape the suffering. Many of these advanced players did learn to escape the suffering through transcendence but at the cost of losing connection with the collective of suffering players meaning that they couldn't help too many other players because the transcended players were just viewed as crazy or out of touch with reality. The newest strategy to help save as many players as possible from suffering is to integrate a transcendent reality (Heaven) and the suffering reality (Earth) into one reality. To accomplish this, it is necessary for those who've found transcendent states to return to everyday life living in two realities simultaneously (including one of suffering) in order to act as a bridge to help as many people as possible transition out of suffering. Eventually, there will be a cut between the two realities once all the players make a choice between transcending out of suffering or staying in suffering for another cycle of the game (even if this choice is not made with full awareness).

I found the movie Bliss (https://youtu.be/ZHtPm8v-yNw) helpful for understanding the reason for the veil, how the veil can go wrong, how difficult it is to help people escape the suffering caused by the veil, how pure transcendence can be a path out of suffering with the cost of losing connection to the collective and being viewed as crazy, and why integration of the two realities (Earth and Heaven) is the current best long term path to solve the problem created by the veil if we don't want to destroy all the players that are suffering. The Matrix is also helpful for understanding the concept of re-entering the Matrix to help those who are still suffering.

[jafar]

My hope is that enough people will outgrow the need for outside authority to guide the way.

Addressing another note, I don't care about harvest. I may leave this life and see it from another perspective, but down here in the trenches under the veil I think it was a bad idea to veil this density just because entities weren't evolving fast enough. It is very hard to see the suffering that results from it. And to what end? To serve the Creator? I don't see why a timeless, infinite source would care whether a M/B/S entity took thousands of or a trillion years to advance. Just my current thinking on that matter. The harvest will be what it will be. The complication of the veil I think is what has prevented "successful" harvests in the past. It also seems counter to free will. But since I am under a cosmic veil, my musings on this subject are likely as ignorant as the mindsets of those who follow religions blindly.

The veil was created to also enable entity to evolve with a fresh new start, without biases from previous experiences, without trauma from previous experiences.
Imagine; for example you were a japanese soldier murdered by american soldiers and now you're born in the USA?
Or vice versa.
Thus I actually consider it a 'blessing'.

Soul signature / character are shaped by experiences and biases.
The recollection of experiences and biases are the one that will makes each soul 'unique'.
Because in essence every soul is the same. (consciousness)

The collected experiences and biases is not lost however, it's well kept.

[Diana]

The veil was created to also enable entity to evolve with a fresh new start, without biases from previous experiences, without trauma from previous experiences.

According to Ra on the archetypes, we do come into an incarnation with biases from past incarnations. They are there whether we remember them or not. I think though, that you meant biases one is consciously aware of.

Imagine; for example you were a japanese soldier murdered by american soldiers and now you're born in the USA?
Or vice versa.
Thus I actually consider it a 'blessing'.

I get what you are saying, but I am not sure something like this could happen without a veil. That is the point—veil = suffering, or so it seems to me.

[Sacred Fool]

That is the point—veil = suffering, or so it seems to me.

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about worship?  Hmm.

I would respond to the above that, yes, in a culture which glorifies the illusory/transient elements of life the resultant absence of social spiritual focus leads many into suffering rather than leading them into the labyrinth of self to seek their own experiences of love and truth.  I don't fault the veil, per se.  The veil requires one to work more pointedly towards spiritual goals, and without solid spiritual guidance this is difficult.  For example, if we regularly enjoyed spiritually focused and truly uplifting public worship rituals, then more of us would begin to have a clue about the deeper nature of self.  But in a place and time where we argue that religion is bad or mine is better than yours, etc., things become completely muddled for most of us.  Dang!

[jafar]

According to Ra on the archetypes, we do come into an incarnation with biases from past incarnations. They are there whether we remember them or not. I think though, that you meant biases one is consciously aware of.

Oh yes the memory of the experience are there, it just that the access are temporarily blocked, for a purpose.

As a metaphor, since you have a new mobile device, let's put all the old memories (photos, videos) on the cloud storage, and start collecting new memories (photos, videos) with the new device. So no memories of cheating boyfriends, bullied on elementary school, failing on classes etc..

Yet of course, when you're ready, all the wonderful photos and videos of you and cheating boyfriends are always available on the cloud and can be downloaded to the new device.

That is the point—veil = suffering,

Let's take the memory of cheating boyfriends example, experiencing / recollecting the memory, is it a really a suffering?
Initially perhaps yes, that's why it's better to store the old memories on the cloud and make it temporarily inaccessible .
Yet after some 'additional experiences' (thus more wisdom and knowledge), accessing the memory of cheating boyfriends might not be a 'suffering' anymore.

"Suffering is optional"
-- Dalai Lama

[Diana]

Let's take the memory of cheating boyfriends example, experiencing / recollecting the memory, is it a really a suffering?
Initially perhaps yes, that's why it's better to store the old memories on the cloud and make it temporarily inaccessible .
Yet after some 'additional experiences' (thus more wisdom and knowledge), accessing the memory of cheating boyfriends might not be a 'suffering' anymore.

"Suffering is optional"
-- Dalai Lama

I agree that in the scenario above suffering is optional as the Dalai Lama says. And this can be done in this lifetime by recognizing patterns and triggers.

This is not the kind of suffering I refer to. I am referring to things like starvation and war. And, mostly the suffering humanity inflicts upon other life forms (not because I value humans less but because humans have choice).

One could say that starvation or being maimed or killed from the horrors of war could be traced to some sort of karmic choice. But how do you justify hurting the plant and animal life dropping nuclear bombs, the torture of animal factory farms or the modern horrors of lambs being cruelly slaughtered? How is this choosing suffering from the sufferer's point of view?

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about worship?  Hmm.

Fair enough. But I will add that some things are intertwined. Also, that worship for one person may mean one thing, and for another person something else—hence discussion on different views. You already pointed out: "Some sing a song of struggle while others sing a song of Divinity." While this makes sense on the surface, I feel it is too simplified. I personally don't think "not getting caught up in the maelstrom" means ignoring what is going on here; rather, I think it means accepting it, but that doesn't also mean I like it. One can love and accept something one doesn't like. 

But if you like I could drop out of this discussion or split this thread. It is not my intention to stir the pot—oh, maybe it is. I've been known.... 

Also, I find this a bit lacking in compassion and maybe insulting. So, to exaggerate to illustrate my point, let's take:

1. Person A: White, privileged. Born into comfortable circumstances and never had to struggle to pay bills or had any survival challenges. This person doesn't even have to work. They live in a nice home. They have lots of time to do anything they want.

2. Person B: Minority, without many resources. Born into poverty and struggle (war-torn country; North Korea; Harlem NY single-parent situation with so little hope or even food to eat). 

Setting aside any karmic or biases from other incarnations, who do you think will find it easier to choose divinity over struggle? I am referring to Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

That said, there is always a choice, and that, I think, you are pointing out. But I have been in wealthy new age circles where people say things like that when they have no idea what struggle is. I am not triggered by this by the way, though I do find it eye-rollingly irritating. 

I would respond to the above that, yes, in a culture which glorifies the illusory/transient elements of life the resultant absence of social spiritual focus leads many into suffering rather than leading them into the labyrinth of self to seek their own experiences of love and truth.I don't fault the veil, per se.  The veil requires one to work more pointedly towards spiritual goals, and without solid spiritual guidance this is difficult.  For example, if we regularly enjoyed spiritually focused and truly uplifting public worship rituals, then more of us would begin to have a clue about the deeper nature of self.

I'm not sure. If those spiritual practices were based on "love and truth" then yes. But religions as they are now are not. The so-called sacred texts would have to be put in their proper places first—as historical artifacts. Otherwise the teachings in them would still be identified with (bible old testament stuff as a good example—genital mutilation; killing enemies; and so on).

But your idea does bring to mind The Grinch Who Stole Christmas. I loved it when the Who's from Whoville came out and sang on Christmas morning even though the Grinch had stolen their presents and Christmas paraphernalia. So perhaps this is closer to what you mean by worship?

  But in a place and time where we argue that religion is bad or mine is better than yours, etc., things become completely muddled for most of us.  Dang!

These are two very different concepts. A particular religion thinking it's the correct one and another is not is one of the reasons religion is bad in general—separation.

[IndigoSalvia]

As the OP, I certainly don't mind if this thread meanders. It's all good discussion.

[IndigoSalvia]

But how do you justify hurting the plant and animal life dropping nuclear bombs, the torture of animal factory farms or the modern horrors of lambs being cruelly slaughtered? How is this choosing suffering from the sufferer's point of view? ... 

Also, I find this a bit lacking in compassion and maybe insulting. So, to exaggerate to illustrate my point, let's take:

1. Person A: White, privileged. Born into comfortable circumstances and never had to struggle to pay bills or had any survival challenges. This person doesn't even have to work. They live in a nice home. They have lots of time to do anything they want.

2. Person B: Minority, without many resources. Born into poverty and struggle (war-torn country; North Korea; Harlem NY single-parent situation with so little hope or even food to eat). 

Setting aside any karmic or biases from other incarnations, who do you think will find it easier to choose divinity over struggle? I am referring to Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Apologies, Diana, for trimming your post. I don't know how to put several quotes from you so I can respond to them separately. 

1. I haven't found a way to reconcile your question about choice from the 2D's point of view. And, I struggle with it. (Do we as 3D have a responsibility to preserve others' free will?) 

My personal approach is that we 3D beings have a sort of shepherd/gardener relationship to 2D beings, and to the Earth as well. To me, it simply means caring, and taking into consideration their needs. But I realize I am far from that ideal, even with the steps I take to walk lightly. 

When I recognize my own inability to reach that ideal, I process it, and then, work on extending to other-selves because we are a collective. 

This exercise doesn't alleviate my pain (which I inexplicably feel in a permeating way ... different wiring than others?). I can't alleviate the pain/discomfort I feel from what I perceive as suffering. So, I make some (restless) peace with it. 

Do you feel/sense pain inside of you when you encounter such situations as you describe? If so, how do you process such? 

2. Diana asks, "... who do you think will find it easier to choose divinity over struggle? I am referring to Maslow's hierarchy of needs." Any answers I come to are reflective of my own 3D life with my unique challenges and comforts. I feel awkward viewing others' journeys from within my own journey because I'm limited by my own 3D MBS experiences. I still notice myself thinking "others have it easy or hard," but then I add a "seemingly" onto it. 

I have toyed with seeing our unique journeys from a pre-incarnative design/incarnative choices perspective. How does each of our journeys serve our individual soul streams, the collective soul streams (or soul river) and ultimately, the 1ICC? 

Though we, humans, experience life at all levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, in a first-person sense, all of these experiences feed into greater and greater collectives. Here, I have choices about how to be here in 3D. I have vacillated between two extremes: hyper-disengagement (resignation/complacency ... what will be, will be) to hyper-engagement (hyper-compassion, intense sense of responsibility). Neither extreme is sustainable for me. I, again, find a restless peace, or balance.  

When you see other-selves experiencing their journeys at different levels of needs/energy centers, how do you experience it? What emotions, thoughts, sensations arise in you? How do you process? 

[Diana]

Apologies, Diana, for trimming your post. I don't know how to put several quotes from you so I can respond to them separately. 

When you are in the text editor making a post or replying to a post (select the little icon that looks like a dialogue bubble at the bottom of the post you want to reply to, and it will open the text editor with the quote intact). From there I will attach a visual for the steps, because if I do it here in a post it will mess with the post and you won't be able to see what I mean.


  replying-to-quotes-in-a-post.jpg (Size: 362.03 KB / Downloads: 4)
(Sorry for the purple line around the white box where I explain begin and end quotes. Just ignore it—it was a mistake I overlooked when I exported the jpeg.)

Do you feel/sense pain inside of you when you encounter such situations as you describe? If so, how do you process such?
...
When you see other-selves experiencing their journeys at different levels of needs/energy centers, how do you experience it? What emotions, thoughts, sensations arise in you? How do you process? 

I do feel pain, and whatever emotions arise from these situations. I am not so advanced that I always process it well (though sometimes I do). But I think the point is to feel and allow the pain, and all the intensity of my response to suffering but not be ruined by it, to accept the pain and the situation (aside from something I can do such as helping out a homeless person with some money or food for example). But this must be done wisely, as too much pain can send one too deeply into despair.

I also try to send loving thoughts—for example—toward miserable animals in pens, factory farms, or tiny corrals by talking to them in my mind and envisioning them in a meadow, free, with young ones. I don't know if this helps the animals but it helps me to balance the pain, and then I suppose indirectly this helps the animals. 

I also donate to orgs that help the homeless, underprivileged, and animals. If I am low on money I just give $5 or whatever I can. I tried volunteering at an animal shelter but it was way too painful for me and I figured my intense sadness was not helping the situation, so I concluded that donations are a better approach until I can deal better with the pain.

We resist pain and that is natural. I finally got to the point of accepting the pain and things changed a bit in an important way, in that I stopped resisting it and so it just flowed better. I also have written to process the pain. For example, I wrote a short story, For the Love of Trees, as at Christmas I have a hard time seeing all the cut-down trees in grocery store parking lots.

[MonadicSpectrum]

  But in a place and time where we argue that religion is bad or mine is better than yours, etc., things become completely muddled for most of us.  Dang!

These are two very different concepts. A particular religion thinking it's the correct one and another is not is one of the reasons religion is bad in general—separation.

Are you not currently thinking that your paradigm about reality is the correct one and all religions are incorrect? Isn't this the same sort of perspective that some religions take that you believe causes separation? Perhaps you are more united with them than you think.  Although, there are also some religions that are totally open to other religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism; it is mainly the Abrahamic faiths that claim to be the only correct religion.

Personally, I think it is totally fine to believe some ideas are closer to the truth than others or more useful than others, and it's also totally fine to express these perspectives as long as one is respectful, kind, and considerate. I believe this can be done without causing separation as well by understanding that only in accepting and expressing differences can we paradoxically ever find unity. Perhaps the hardest part of this paradox is accepting even those that don't accept other beliefs and realizing that unity is not found by changing what they believe but only by changing how we perceive their beliefs as already being included in the unity that always exists. And when you change the way you look at something, that thing changes.

If people haven't realized this about me yet on this forum, I'm a song person for solidifying messages. This song comes to mind for me for viewing all beings as participating in a symphony and accepting even those instruments that claim to have the only and best song as already included in the unified symphony of All That Is.

https://youtu.be/9DSMgVG0--8

You are my symphony
By your side, we are unity
You are my energy
My guiding light, we are unity

[Sacred Fool]

But your idea does bring to mind The Grinch Who Stole Christmas. I loved it when the Who's from Whoville came out and sang on Christmas morning even though the Grinch had stolen their presents and Christmas paraphernalia. So perhaps this is closer to what you mean by worship?

This is a wonderful expression of what I'm trying to point to.

[jafar]

I agree that in the scenario above suffering is optional as the Dalai Lama says. And this can be done in this lifetime by recognizing patterns and triggers.

This is not the kind of suffering I refer to. I am referring to things like starvation and war. And, mostly the suffering humanity inflicts upon other life forms (not because I value humans less but because humans have choice).

One could say that starvation or being maimed or killed from the horrors of war could be traced to some sort of karmic choice. But how do you justify hurting the plant and animal life dropping nuclear bombs, the torture of animal factory farms or the modern horrors of lambs being cruelly slaughtered? How is this choosing suffering from the sufferer's point of view?

Events happened.
Suffering or Not Suffering is how an entity reacted to those event.
In such manner thus Dalai Lama stated his opinion, to suffer is optional because there's always another option that one can choose which is not to suffer.


Now let's take war as a catalytic experience.
Observe how many people love war experience nowadays?
Battlefield, Call Of Duty, Counterstrike just to name a few.
Can you really say that they're suffering from those experiences?

Some might take those experience too seriously and becoming fully immersed in it and they suffered because of it.
There's a term for that, it's called "Gamer Rage".

Now let's take what happened to Mr Lama as an example.
Invaded, Exiled, lost a kingdom, now a refugee in India.

And does he think that he's 'suffering' because of it?
Does he ever hate China or Chinese?
Does he ever rally his people to terrorize China or start an armed struggle and fought for his kingdom?

To suffer or not suffer is always an option that we can choose.
Regardless of the event.

“Altruism is ultimate source of happiness”
-- Dalai Lama

[Diana]

Now let's take war as a catalytic experience.
Observe how many people love war experience nowadays?
Battlefield, Call Of Duty, Counterstrike just to name a few.
Can you really say that they're suffering from those experiences?

Are you referring to video games?

[Diana]

Are you not currently thinking that your paradigm about reality is the correct one and all religions are incorrect? Isn't this the same sort of perspective that some religions take that you believe causes separation? Perhaps you are more united with them than you think.  Although, there are also some religions that are totally open to other religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism; it is mainly the Abrahamic faiths that claim to be the only correct religion.

I am not attempting to be "right," just logical, and as unattached an observer as I can be at any given time. I do hope I have nothing in common with any dogmatic religion. I do not have beliefs, only working theories, as I endeavor to keep my open not closed, in order to allow for growth, new information, widening views, and change.

[Sacred Fool]

One could say that starvation or being maimed or killed from the horrors of war could be traced to some sort of karmic choice. But how do you justify hurting the plant and animal life dropping nuclear bombs, the torture of animal factory farms or the modern horrors of lambs being cruelly slaughtered? How is this choosing suffering from the sufferer's point of view?

What is cruel upon the level of the illusion may be purposeful through the eyes of Spirit.  Some find it useful neither to confuse nor conflate these two levels.  When the lessons of one plane are no longer needed, one moves along to further spiritual study.  The lessons of this tumultuous classroom, the aliens say, are meant to lead us to abandon reliance upon our orientation towards the illusion and take refuge in the heart.  From there, through those eyes, the old ways are experienced differently; but seen merely from a standpoint within the illusion, very little changes.

It might be similar with worship.  Simply seen from the standpoint of the illusion, it may appear of questionable worth, but through the eyes of the heart it has unending value.  Moving from one viewpoint to the other, they say, is but a journey of 14 or so inches from the head to the heart.

[MonadicSpectrum]

I am not attempting to be "right," just logical, and as unattached an observer as I can be at any given time. I do hope I have nothing in common with any dogmatic religion. I do not have beliefs, only working theories, as I endeavor to keep my open not closed, in order to allow for growth, new information, widening views, and change.

That makes sense. It appears to me that you don't have a problem with religion itself but rather with dogmas, close-minded ideas, control, and violence that many religious people exhibit. Would you still be against religion in general if it was transformed to be open-minded, loving, and peaceful?

[IndigoSalvia]

Would you still be against religion in general if it was transformed to be open-minded, loving, and peaceful?

You got to the heart of the matter, for me, MonadicSpectrum. Insofar as I perceive that a religion - or broadly, any belief system -  espouses separation and domination, that throws up yellow flags for me. No reason to throw the baby out with the bath water, as another person wrote. I keep only what resonates. 

Same goes for the concept of worship. I have read facets of worship here in this thread that resonate for me; whereas my own concept, formed from childhood experiences, did not. So, I'm sifting/processing. 

Is there such a religion? Is there a collection of thought-forms/words that is impervious to distortion? 

I think that such is rarely, if ever, found in 3D. To me, everything here in 3D is open to interpretation (distortion). That's the purpose: to process, and make choices, again and again. 

The higher density beings found that, time after time, their teachings became distorted and had unintended ramifications. Here, on this forum, we are exploring our distortions of the Law of One as provided by Ra, et al. We are opening our hearts to one another, and finding common ground that transcends the limitations of, say, our 3D language. To me, this is the birth of a 4D SMC.

[flofrog]

It seems to me that with religion as soon as a group is formed, then there is an outside, and in the matter of religion, it’s like the inside is right and the outside is wrong, as soon as there’s some dogma in. I have a feeling this is a sentiment most shared here by the many who post on these forums…

[jafar]

Are you referring to video games?

Isn't this physical world is a kin of video games? or should I say 'virtualized reality games'?

So yes, that's the closest model of 'a consciousness experiencing a virtual reality world through an avatar / identity' that everyone in this physical world can relate to.
And also the closest model of 'a consciousness assuming multiple avatar / identities and spawning / projecting itself to any point of space / time where the space / time itself is actually a simulated reality / virtual world'.

And the before mentioned games is a perfect model for a realm / dimension where separation thus conflict must happened.
As experiencing separation thus conflict is the entire objective of the game thus the reason why the programmer created the game in the first place.

And to tie up to the main topic of the thread, 'worshipping' or 'being attached' to any element within the 'virtualized reality' is quite pointless, since it's all temporary, simulated and not real to begin with. And that include 'religion', 'figure/character', 'books that declared as holy', 'places/location', 'the avatar / character in the game', 'game credit / money', 'aliens', 'deities' or 'gods/goddesses'.


"Brahman Satyam, Jagat Mithya"
(Only) Brahman is real, the universe is unreal.

[MonadicSpectrum]

It seems to me that with religion as soon as a group is formed, then there is an outside, and in the matter of religion, it’s like the inside is right and the outside is wrong, as soon as there’s some dogma in.  I have a feeling this is a sentiment most shared here by the many who post on these forums…

Is there such a religion? Is there a collection of thought-forms/words that is impervious to distortion?

You both are also getting to the heart of the matter. I think most religions seek to be loving, peaceful, and accepting of others in theory but usually fail to accomplish that in practice. I don't foresee "fixing" religion by generating new ideas or a collection of new beliefs but rather helping religious folks become closer to their ideal of being loving and peaceful in practice. I believe the best way to do this is to set the example of being loving and accepting in practice.

I've met plenty of religious folks who are very loving, peaceful, and open-minded so I know it is not the core religious beliefs themselves that are the root cause of the disharmony of religious history. I think part of the problem is that the negative spiritual forces realize that any organized religion that successfully helped polarize humanity positively would result in them losing much power so they quickly identify such efforts that gain momentum and seek to corrupt it. I also think it is important to realize that if we want to unite humanity into a social memory complex, it likely won't happen without building on and uniting religious foundations across the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re...opulations

[flofrog]

I've met plenty of religious folks who are very loving, peaceful, and open-minded so I know it is not the core religious beliefs themselves that are the root cause of the disharmony of religious history. I think part of the problem is that the negative spiritual forces realize that any organized religion that successfully helped polarize humanity positively would result in them losing much power so they quickly identify such efforts that gain momentum and seek to corrupt it. I also think it is important to realize that if we want to unite humanity into a social memory complex, it likely won't happen without building on and uniting religious foundations across the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re...opulations

Absolutely MonadicSpectrum,  same here, I have met loving religious folks but interestingly all those that I found loving were very humble. I think that as peaceful and loving an initial religious group is, it is probably quite difficult in third density that as its power grows through both spiritual works and numbers,  it's difficult that some hierarchy doesn't happen,  ( after all Ra does speak about divine hierarchy in many areas such as the ways harvest naturally happens, hierarchy in fourth and fifth and sixth density and so on ) so it's difficult in third where the veil exists, for a large group with nascent hierarchy that some little folks do not try to take power in that nascent hierarchy over others, rather than taking power humbly from spiritual work.  

I think social memory complex STO might only happen when everyone reaches same humility level and so, naturally,  all melt together in a very simple natural way. Somehow it's the way to get into what Ra speaks in the first session as " In our vibration the polarities are harmonized, the complexities are simplified, and the paradoxes have their solutions."  And if this doesn't excalty happen in the passage to 4th density, at least it's the start,  

[IndigoSalvia]

You both are also getting to the heart of the matter. I think most religions seek to be loving, peaceful, and accepting of others in theory but usually fail to accomplish that in practice. I don't foresee "fixing" religion by generating new ideas or a collection of new beliefs but rather helping religious folks become closer to their ideal of being loving and peaceful in practice. I believe the best way to do this is to set the example of being loving and accepting in practice.

I've met plenty of religious folks who are very loving, peaceful, and open-minded so I know it is not the core religious beliefs themselves that are the root cause of the disharmony of religious history. I think part of the problem is that the negative spiritual forces realize that any organized religion that successfully helped polarize humanity positively would result in them losing much power so they quickly identify such efforts that gain momentum and seek to corrupt it. I also think it is important to realize that if we want to unite humanity into a social memory complex, it likely won't happen without building on and uniting religious foundations across the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re...opulations

Good point. I agree: it would be efficient to recognize and build upon common ground. I wonder how us humans are doing in this regard: are we, collectively, more apt to see unity or separation.

[flofrog]

Good point. I agree: it would be efficient to recognize and build upon common ground. I wonder how us humans are doing in this regard: are we, collectively, more apt to see unity or separation.

Perhaps, due to the resent chaos we are more apt to see first, separation, but that might expand our thirst for unity within our heart ?

[Sacred Fool]

I think social memory complex STO might only happen when everyone reaches same humility level and so, naturally,  all melt together in a very simple natural way.

Sure, we're comforted when we're surrounded by those of like mind...but we grow when we're challenged.  One kind of harmony is self assuring and self protective.  Another seeks nothing of the kind, only Divinity in full measure, raw and unfiltered.  I see voices here preferring the former while worship, I would say--as a true experience of surrender--can reach out way beyond the comfortable ideations of the armchair philosopher.  One may seek to experience transcendence in worship while another may be seeking a comfortable echo chamber on the internet.

I'm not trying to indict anyone here or elsewhere, I'm just offering elements of possibility which may have been overlooked thus far.  After all, I've certainly played many times on both sides of the net myself.

[Diana]

Sacred Fool pid='307725' dateline='1639030416']Sure, we're comforted when we're surrounded by those of like mind...but we grow when we're challenged.  One kind of harmony is self assuring and self protective.  Another seeks nothing of the kind, only Divinity in full measure, raw and unfiltered.  I see voices here preferring the former while worship, I would say--as a true experience of surrender--can reach out way beyond the comfortable ideations of the armchair philosopher.  One may seek to experience transcendence in worship while another may be seeking a comfortable echo chamber on the internet.

I'm not trying to indict anyone here or elsewhere, I'm just offering elements of possibility which may have been overlooked thus far.  After all, I've certainly played many times on both sides of the net myself.

If I understand your comments, they seem circular to me. A person seeking self-assurance and self-protection I doubt would then be open enough to transcend it just because they engage in worship. Would they not just reap what they are seeking?

Perhaps just the nature of a one-pointed focus, which is sometimes used in meditation, will allow a person to go beyond their constructed boundaries accessing a wider vista of experience, but, to perhaps disgustingly exaggerate, what if that one-pointed focus was white supremacy? Coming from a person whose paradigm is bounded by dogma of any kind, how then is that person able to open up to what lies beyond it? 

On the other hand, I think anything is possible. So, taking my above example, a white supremacist (WM), and looking to the Significator of the Mind, we will see that WM is a role being played out here and acted upon, but there are cartouches at the bottom of WM's constructed world representing distilled biases from other experiences (incarnations). So we can see that WM is not just a what he appears to be in this life, but is much more. Then there is also the higher self harking from 6th density. So based on this view, it seems possible that any individual could in fact transcend any role being played here in this life. It would require I think a certain amount of openness, a tiny crack or door in the armor of the paradigm—which, could be seen to happen periodically in the Potentiator of the Spirit.


  significator of the mind.jpg (Size: 135.9 KB / Downloads: 80)
  potentiator of the spirit.jpg (Size: 130.81 KB / Downloads: 3)

[Sacred Fool]

A person seeking self-assurance and self-protection I doubt would then be open enough to transcend it just because they engage in worship. Would they not just reap what they are seeking?

Are we not all multi-layered beings seeking assurance and protection as well as growth.  The difference, it seems to me, is in how these are proportioned per each individual.  My point was that dismissiveness towards religion which ends up discarding a genuine exploration of the value of worship is a markedly inefficient use of catalyst, in my view.

Perhaps just the nature of a one-pointed focus, which is sometimes used in meditation, will allow a person to go beyond their constructed boundaries accessing a wider vista of experience, but, to perhaps disgustingly exaggerate, what if that one-pointed focus was white supremacy? Coming from a person whose paradigm is bounded by dogma of any kind, how then is that person able to open up to what lies beyond it?

You enjoy your thought experiments and I will seek Self elsewhere.