How Do STS's View Other Selves?
09-28-2016, 11:52 AM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
Evil basicly really is just a facet of good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-28-2016, 02:16 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-28-2016, 11:37 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  Someone can perceive itself as evil and can be considered evil by others, in this I think evil is an actual thing because it is a construct through which the creator misperceive itself. But to see evil is still just inability to see good. There is no evil in that in full awareness of other-self you would see no evil but instead good, always. Evil basicly is good that has been twisted and is made hard to recognize as good.

At the risk of splitting conceptual hairs:

Evil is just selfishness, and selfishness certainly exists within the context of the illusion, as I've said ad nauseum in this thread. But I wouldn't necessarily say that seeing selfishness is a failure to see self-lessness (what I'm calling good). To me that is like saying seeing green is just a failure to see red. The white that both colors extend from is neither of them. To me, evil and good are just a natural consequence of the reality of a relationship between self and others. When self and others are seen as one (and not in a psuedo pretend spiritual sense), then there is no good or evil, STO or STS, just the creator. But I just don't personally believe denying the apparent manifestations of our 3rd density illusion leads one to a greater illumination, in fact, I think it stunts our evolution in the short term to fail to recognize these things. It is sort of like playing a game, but you refuse to even acknowledge the programmed elements -- the characters attacking you, the life bar, the powerups, and just sitting there, pretending its not happening because, after all, its just a game. You might be right from a broader perspective, but that behavior and thinking won't win the game, just keep you stuck on the same level until you begin to play and pay attention to the elements of experience.    

But if anything, I've come around to conceding that evil is, indeed, an absolutely terrible choice of word in any conversation.

Not because I'm wrong about the equivalency of the word with its sympathetic polarity, mind you, but simply because this thread has made it painfully clear to me that no matter how much reasoning or logic is offered, people will continue, in 99.9% of the cases, to see it in the same way (as a judgmental label rather than a simple descriptive characteristic) because they are accustomed to understanding it that way. People will always default to their dominant conceptual programming. I can't fault them for that. It's human nature (and also religion has, for thousands of years, pounded into peoples heads that evil was not an option for spiritual evolution, and did a grade A job of brainwashing the masses into seeing it that way).  

(09-28-2016, 11:37 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  I don't deny that evil can be a useful term for growth, but still, so long you seek to see evil you seek to look at the illusion and not what is underneath. You make your idea about the surface but don't look beneath it, because evil ever is a mask that hides what's underneath. I can recognize the archetype of evil but that does not mean I need to distill it as evil within myself. If I see the creator hurthing others, then I see the creator hurting itself, separating from itself, burrying it's light self deeper and deeper within until it is lost sight of.

I don't seek to see evil any more than I seek to see selfishness, or unselfishness. I simply look out at the world, and I try to see 'what is'. I see green, I see red, I see cold, I see warm, I see pleasure and I see pain. I don't make assumptions about peoples behavior. Or, at least, I try not to. If I see what looks like evil/selfishness to me, I try not to assume what their intentions were, maybe their intent was good for all I know. All I can look at is the end result. I just don't pretend that something looks like 'goodness' to me when it doesn't. I don't look on all that manifests in our world and see it all as love and light, and to be honest, I don't think the Logos does either. It's just my opinion, but there it is. I personally don't think it looks at suffering and says, 'mmmm yeah, good stuff there.' it just recognizes it as the price of illumination ("you gotta risk it to get the biscuit!". A means to an end. A natural consequence, or potential, reflexively generated by the exploration of duality. We needed something to contrast What Is, and What is Not just happens to be the fickle and transient moving cloud that the unmoving and changeless mountain uses as a frame of reference to comprehend, measure, or otherwise KNOW its own existence. And I think some portions or beings move too far into their exploration of that attenuation of light, or resistance to unity, and experience terrible suffering as a result (but the resulting positive karma generated grants them faster evolution later on).

I'm sure a lot of the disagreements in this thread with various concepts are probably, to a large extent, semantic in nature. But for the most part, I enjoy hashing out the fine nuances of their conceptual nature.

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-28-2016, 03:15 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-28-2016, 08:20 AM)Infinite Unity Wrote:  You associate good and evil with understanding and misunderstanding? Sounds mentally racial.

No and yes.  I think i was associating the words "good and evil" themselves with misunderstanding (of positive/negative polarity) ... but yes, i do associate negative polarity with ?intentional (?purposeful) misunderstanding.

"Mentally racial?" Maybe.  But duality (and ... ?spectrum division?) in general feels that way to me.

(09-28-2016, 02:16 PM)anagogy Wrote:  Evil is just selfishness, and selfishness certainly exists within the context of the illusion, as I've said ad nauseum in this thread. But I wouldn't necessarily say that seeing selfishness is a failure to see self-lessness (what I'm calling good).

I don't feel this.  (I'll use positive/negative polarity ... i'm still uncomfortable with good/evil).

Both appear equally selfish and selfless from my perspective.  If i had to attempt a similar association, it would be:

positive polarity = self / other-self ?expression (i don't have a good word for this.  "expressing that i am"?  "experiencing joy that i exist"?  something like that).

negative polarity = self /other-self ?denial ... ?destruction ("i am not what i am"?   "existing hurts, please end it ... and give me carnal pleasures and/or obliviousness until you're finished"?)

Light shines gladly wherever there is no choice to prevent it ... gives willingly of itself indiscriminately with no ?fear that it may be diminished in the process (because it knows that it cannot be).

Darkness says "i have secrets.  step into me and find them,"  the biggest secret being "i intend to consume all that you are."  Eventually -- no matter how powerful -- the depth and charge seems to becomes strong enough to overpower and eclipse the ... ?expression of existence? of the willing seeker.

From the perspective of negative polarity, merging with the light and being consumed by the darkness are the same thing.  The only choice is (again... clunky words: ) "which master to serve."  Either way the self appears to be lost.

... **blinks**

dammit, anagogy!  how are you doing that?  I think i've just typed myself into seeing your point. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes OpalE's post:
anagogy
09-29-2016, 12:45 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-28-2016, 02:16 PM)anagogy Wrote:  ...

Perceiving evil is a paradox and realizing that there is no evil within your reality is one of the great learnings of the Creator of Itself. The Creator is not evil, you are not evil, others are not evil, no portion of your reality ever is evil. You have the freedom to misperceive that there is evil, but awareness that aligns itself with unity won't see evil because to see evil is to misperceive things. You have linked evil with extreme selfishness, well there is no true selfishness either. Selfishness is an illusion and paradox, just like evil. Every single time you believe someone is selfish, you are misunderstanding them and the cause and effect of their imbalances which is without selfishness. If you see the Creator as non-dual selflessness that is considerate of both self and other-selves in the most fair fashion, then you understand that seeming selfishness is simply considerate of things you perceive not and which you fail to understand the balance of it's conditions through which selflessness manifest itself for you to see.
Extreme selfishness and extreme selflessness (martyrdom) are simply two great states of imbalance . One steps upon the portions of creation it is less intimate with, while the other steps upon the portion of creation it is most intimate with, both because of a state of imbalance in their awareness.

You said you believe there is no greater illumination to find in perceiving no evil, well I think that is really plain wrong. The realization of perceiving no evil is probably one that is most freeing realization one can have that has most potential to boost your positive polarity. It's literally allowing yourself to incarnate a default postive feedback of your reality, even when you perceive seeming-negativity. Not to speak that to perceive no evil is the easiest shortcut out of any state you would consider to be evil, it's really to make the choice to see the light where light is what there is to see.

I think what you said about the moral compass is the most misguided portion of what you said. First off, you can't really draw any objective line by asking a whole bunch of completely confused people with little understanding of both themselves and others. Secondly, the moral compass you speak is ever in relation to your unconscious. When you infringe, you really just step upon your own feelings (others are a mirror upon yourself), this is why infringement is a somewhat abstract concept, it ever only truly relates to yourself. So is there an objective line? No, there is none but within yourself you should have an illusionary subjective one that is delimited by your inner feelings and understanding of your reality and this is what is used to either polarize toward the positive or the negative. This line also is ever shifting and evolving until your resolve all paradox and it is no more.

I think the cold/warm analogy is a tad off, cold is a subjective degree of warmth that is not pleasant to the self. So this analogy makes sense in that you can feel something to be infringement (cold), while an other-self perceives the same action as positive (hot), just like someone who lives in the South would think a given tempurature is cold while someone who lives in the North would consider the same as hot. That's a bit my point about the moral compass, it's just your subjective perception of what is objectively nothing but unity.

Suffering certainly is not the price of illumination, it is part of what is sought.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Elros's post:
OpalE
09-29-2016, 01:58 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
I will add that I don't deny that we can make choices based upon what is felt to be wrong (archetype of evil) due to contradictions within the distortions of self, but to understand the choices of others (and/or yourself) as selfish really forever is a misperception of limited awareness that will fade away in it's own "fated" time.

To see no evil is not wishful thinking, it's just a step of light.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like Elros's post:
Infinite Unity, OpalE
09-29-2016, 02:52 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-27-2016, 04:30 PM)OpalE Wrote:  Draw a circle in the sand.  Call its insides "What Is."  Draw a line compartmentalizing it.  Brand one of those sections as lesser / wrong / cosmically accidental ... or even worse (using whatever criteria you please), judge it as having no right to exist.  Congratulations, you've just created your own opposition.  Having fun meeting it continually as it tries to weasel its way back into its rightful place (or exact vengeance on you-who-have-wronged it).

I still believe this. Draw lines in reality (cast judgements) and you create your own illusion. To draw these for others (i.e. convince them that one's own distortions are the "true nature of reality") is to create their illusion for them ... to pull them into the particular illusion you've crafted. It's an STS power-game: know the board, know the rules, work your advantage in the game. What better way to claim that advantage that to spawn the rules (and the game itself) from your own distortions?


One of the first concepts outlined in the Ra material:

Ra (The Law of One, Book I, Session 1) Wrote:In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things.

The distinction between 'cosmic truth' and 'truth within the illusion' is just one more arbitrary distortion by "which you amuse yourself," because:


Ra (The Law of One, Book I, Session 1) Wrote:You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like OpalE's post:
Elros, Infinite Unity
09-29-2016, 03:20 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-29-2016, 03:24 PM by anagogy.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-29-2016, 12:45 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  Perceiving evil is a paradox and realizing that there is no evil within your reality is one of the great learnings of the Creator of Itself. The Creator is not evil, you are not evil, others are not evil, no portion of your reality ever is evil. You have the freedom to misperceive that there is evil, but awareness that aligns itself with unity won't see evil because to see evil is to misperceive things. You have linked evil with extreme selfishness, well there is no true selfishness either. Selfishness is an illusion and paradox, just like evil. Every single time you believe someone is selfish, you are misunderstanding them and the cause and effect of their imbalances which is without selfishness. If you see the Creator as non-dual selflessness that is considerate of both self and other-selves in the most fair fashion, then you understand that seeming selfishness is simply considerate of things you perceive not and which you fail to understand the balance of it's conditions through which selflessness manifest itself for you to see.

You can dismiss almost anything as "not existing" if you recourse to nonduality. Because almost everything cancels out in nonduality. I have no disagreement with you on that front, and never have.

But when you attempt to apply the rules of the Absolute to the relative universe of duality you are moving backwards in my opinion, by looking at manifestations which are actual within our illusion, and then pretending they aren't real. You can say they are illusions, sure, but just like the game analogy I presented earlier you still have to deal with them if you want to progress.

For example: I could say, "Well physicality isn't real, and every time you see solid matter you are misperceiving what is really there, because in the Absolute there is no tangible form. Your translation of reality is not in alignment with nonduality." But if you go running full blast at a concrete wall, I'll wager the manifestation will convince you mightily of its "realness".

And this is why it is absurd to pretend evil doesn't exist. To not acknowledge it is equivalent to pretending pain doesn't exist. Does pretending pain doesn't exist make it, the so called "illusory manifestation", go away? No, the distortion remains. So the attempt to clear it via that method was a failure from my perspective.

(09-29-2016, 12:45 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  Extreme selfishness and extreme selflessness (martyrdom) are simply two great states of imbalance . One steps upon the portions of creation it is less intimate with, while the other steps upon the portion of creation it is most intimate with, both because of a state of imbalance in their awareness.

You said you believe there is no greater illumination to find in perceiving no evil, well I think that is really plain wrong. The realization of perceiving no evil is probably one that is most freeing realization one can have that has most potential to boost your positive polarity. It's literally allowing yourself to incarnate a default postive feedback of your reality, even when you perceive seeming-negativity. Not to speak that to perceive no evil is the easiest shortcut out of any state you would consider to be evil, it's really to make the choice to see the light where light is what there is to see.

Just because I see and acknowledge that evil exists doesn't mean that I'm not optimistic. It just means that if I see one man murder another man in cold blood, I don't delude myself into thinking he did it for the benefit of mankind. It makes me more objective, because I'm not attempting to filter some presumed distortion from my reality. It just means I don't conflate selfishness with its complete opposite. Frankly, in my opinion, conflating the two doesn't lead to more harmony, it leads to much much less, because you are more likely to be manipulated by negatively oriented beings.

But I really do sincerely believe that realizing nondual awareness is *NOT* about pretending any given dichotomy is not real, but rather CLEARLY perceiving the dichotomy, which leads naturally to the perception of the continuum, or dimension of experience, that they both extend from. So rather than pretend evil doesn't exist, I see it for what it is, and in clearly seeing it, I see a real glimpse of the creator, rather than some preconceived notion of how I imagine it to be.

(09-29-2016, 12:45 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  I think what you said about the moral compass is the most misguided portion of what you said. First off, you can't really draw any objective line by asking a whole bunch of completely confused people with little understanding of both themselves and others. Secondly, the moral compass you speak is ever in relation to your unconscious. When you infringe, you really just step upon your own feelings (others are a mirror upon yourself), this is why infringement is a somewhat abstract concept, it ever only truly relates to yourself. So is there an objective line? No, there is none but within yourself you should have an illusionary subjective one that is delimited by your inner feelings and understanding of your reality and this is what is used to either polarize toward the positive or the negative. This line also is ever shifting and evolving until your resolve all paradox and it is no more.

I don't believe I said anything about an objective line in the sand delineating what constitutes infringement, but for a conscious and self aware being it is a simple matter of realizing if something doesn't feel good to you, it probably doesn't feel good to others either. There will certainly be distortions, because not everybody likes or dislikes the same things, but the core factor is that a self aware being knows that other beings are conscious and suffer as well, so at some point in any given interaction with another, it will become obvious that an action is an infringement.

They will say something to the effect of, "Hey jerk! You're infringing on me!"  Tongue

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes anagogy's post:
Infinite Unity
09-29-2016, 04:13 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-29-2018, 09:54 AM by GentleWanderer.)
______
_______


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes GentleWanderer's post:
Infinite Unity
09-29-2016, 05:36 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  You can dismiss almost anything as "not existing" if you recourse to nonduality. Because almost everything cancels out in nonduality. I have no disagreement with you on that front, and never have.

Nonduality integrates and does not dismiss though, to dismiss would be to separate/dualize. This is why I say the term evil hints toward a facet of good, because good integrates what the misnommer evil seek to portray.

(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  But when you attempt to apply the rules of the Absolute to the relative universe of duality you are moving backwards in my opinion, by looking at manifestations which are actual within our illusion, and then pretending they aren't real. You can say they are illusions, sure, but just like the game analogy I presented earlier you still have to deal with them if you want to progress.

I did speak of the spiritual utility of the archetype of evil. It is a useful misperception with it's own lessons but remains a misperception of yourself and/or others, and/or the Creator.

Of course to say there is no evil is not a way to avoid progress. If you come to the realization that there is no evil, then you will feel that there is no evil. If a situation still triggers you, then you won't tell yourself that the other person is evil but instead that you are offered a mirror that sheds light upon that you still have work to do upon yourself. Bottomline, at some point no more evil is seen by the self because one's understanding is too aligned with unity to perceive evil in others. The illusionary archetype can be recognized, but the understanding transmutes "what is not" into "what is".

(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  For example: I could say, "Well physicality isn't real, and every time you see solid matter you are misperceiving what is really there, because in the Absolute there is no tangible form. Your translation of reality is not in alignment with nonduality." But if you go running full blast at a concrete wall, I'll wager the manifestation will convince you mightily of its "realness".

There is probably a lot of pros toward gaining an understanding that reality truly is non-physical. But to non-dualize would be to perceive that reality while being non-physical offers the illusion of physically within it's non-physically, but remains not constrained by it. You can then ponder how this aspect of reality affects you in your daily life (because it does).

(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  And this is why it is absurd to pretend evil doesn't exist. To not acknowledge it is equivalent to pretending pain doesn't exist. Does pretending pain doesn't exist make it, the so called "illusory manifestation", go away? No, the distortion remains. So the attempt to clear it via that method was a failure from my perspective.

I think you miss the point that to not see evil, you need to first learn your lessons about evil and distill it within yourself. Then others can have distortions that relate with lessons regarding the illusion of evil, but you won't yourself. Someone can think of itself as evil, but you'll know the person is nothing evil. Others can think a group of people are evil, but you will know they are not evil, that the truth behind the seeming-evilness is quite something other.


(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  Just because I see and acknowledge that evil exists doesn't mean that I'm not optimistic. It just means that if I see one man murder another man in cold blood, I don't delude myself into thinking he did it for the benefit of mankind. It makes me more objective, because I'm not attempting to filter some presumed distortion from my reality. It just means I don't conflate selfishness with its complete opposite. Frankly, in my opinion, conflating the two doesn't lead to more harmony, it leads to much much less, because you are more likely to be manipulated by negatively oriented beings.

Have you considered that maybe it is good you misinterpret? Is good to do something for the sake of a large group of people?

Also, to not see evil does not mean you can't recognize the distortions of an other-self. Just recnognize that evil is the illusionary way to look at things and that it is stopping at the surface of the distortions which run deeper. Like I said, there is no evil, what you interpret as evil is not evil. You could call it self disalignment with it's reality, and I'd agree.

(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  But I really do sincerely believe that realizing nondual awareness is *NOT* about pretending any given dichotomy is not real, but rather CLEARLY perceiving the dichotomy, which leads naturally to the perception of the continuum, or dimension of experience, that they both extend from. So rather than pretend evil doesn't exist, I see it for what it is, and in clearly seeing it, I see a real glimpse of the creator, rather than some preconceived notion of how I imagine it to be.

As I said just above, evil is a state of disalignment with your reality, that is to look objectively at things, but usually the term evil refers to a non-clear perception of something. It's really just the easy way, calling something evil is what mankind has been doing for milleniums of confusion.

I could label anything that is unwell as evil, because from the perspective of well people it absorbs the well being of those who are well. Would that make sense? No because it is inconsiderate of why the unwell person is not well and creates a separation between those who are well and those who are unwell, while they are truly the one same thing under different circumstances.

(09-29-2016, 03:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  I don't believe I said anything about an objective line in the sand delineating what constitutes infringement, but for a conscious and self aware being it is a simple matter of realizing if something doesn't feel good to you, it probably doesn't feel good to others either. There will certainly be distortions, because not everybody likes or dislikes the same things, but the core factor is that a self aware being knows that other beings are conscious and suffer as well, so at some point in any given interaction with another, it will become obvious that an action is an infringement.

They will say something to the effect of, "Hey jerk! You're infringing on me!"  Tongue

I think the things that I say are more of a tool to understand others, or not block in your attempt to understand them. If you stop at evil, you don't go beneath the mask of evil, because even as a thing, it's still just a mask.

As for yourself, whatever you think, you will have this abstract line (compass thing) upon which you will have to make choices. There is no avoiding that, because we work with feelings and face ourselves in a conscious or unconscious fashion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-29-2016, 05:47 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
Also I think the mask of evil drops once it stops seeing itself as evil (release of karma). So for an evil person to heal from being evil, it needs to perceive it never was that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like Elros's post:
Infinite Unity, OpalE
09-29-2016, 09:56 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-29-2016, 05:36 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  Nonduality integrates and does not dismiss though, to dismiss would be to separate/dualize. This is why I say the term evil hints toward a facet of good, because good integrates what the misnommer evil seek to portray.

I have decided to stop using the word 'evil', in any context. I think it just causes a lot of unnecessary confusion for people who have extraneous connotations associated with it (this thread has thoroughly convinced me). However, I still believe it is essentially synonymous with selfishness/negative polarity. I just have no desire to fight the uphill battle of peoples aversive association to it as something other than a simple behavioral description.

But in any case, all I can really say is that I don't see Wholeness or Unity as synonomous with positivity in the sense of polarity. In terms of polarity, and its relationship to nonduality, or Unity, I see Unity as neither positive nor negative. So negative isn't a subset of positive, nor is positive a subset of negative. They are both subsets of Unity.

So while I'm tempted to split hairs over your terminology and argue with you, in exquisite detail, I will just say, I think I see what you are trying to say. I don't like the way you say it, and I would say it very differently probably, but I think we ultimately mean the same thing.

I think the easiest and clearest way to conceptualize negative and positive, for me, and how they integrate into the One is to simply see the north pole of positive polarity and the south pole of negative polarity in terms of the spectrum of white light. The violet side is positive polarity, and the red side is negative polarity. They are opposites on the visible light spectrum, yet both are integrated into the white light manifestation.

As long as there is a relationship between self and others, there is polarity. I think in Unity, or the metaphorical white light, there are no selves, or at the very least, there are no relationships with others, and thus, no polarity. There is consciousness, but it has no center, or we could say its center is everywhere.

So rather than continue fussing about your way of describing it, that's where I will leave it. That's how I feel most comfortable defining it.

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-29-2016, 10:32 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-29-2016, 10:47 PM by Elros.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
I still think there is still a truer pole from which emerges the other. Every emotion has it's dualized counterpart, so the negative spectrum ever is but the reflection of the positive spectrum. It is it's shadow. To look at the underlying love can mean to look at the positive counterpart of negative emotions to see the purity of their roots. There is no impure emotion, there are facets of love that are ever contained in any other facets.

A negative emotion really is just a positive one past it's tolerance point. That is when the enclosement of the heart happens, when the desire to feel love is rejected. "I don't want to love again", "I don't want to trust again", "I can gain no good from others", "I can only count on myself"... those kind of thoughts that build up over time. To make a true negative adept, you probably need to have a soul go through a fair load of negativity from even it's second density experiences. The creator truly is not inherently negative, without confusion a closed heart state was not even known.

..karmic loops... across the cycles...

I think the truth that here matters a lot is that any person is a reflection of how you'd be through their experience, so here you can ask yourself what is our fundamental nature that is being reflected? I believe it is positive before being negative. Positive is what is and negative is what is not. So what is what is not? Just what is... distorted and confused through illusions.

Evil really is a reflection of good. It it it's mirror, because good is something innocent, fragile, twistable, misguidable, that needs to be protected and taken care of. Evil is good put through evilish conditions and sheds a greater light upon it's purity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-29-2016, 10:42 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
Any individual can only be evil because they are fundamentally good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-30-2016, 05:20 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-30-2016, 05:29 PM by anagogy.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-29-2016, 10:32 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  I still think there is still a truer pole from which emerges the other. Every emotion has it's dualized counterpart, so the negative spectrum ever is but the reflection of the positive spectrum. It is it's shadow. To look at the underlying love can mean to look at the positive counterpart of negative emotions to see the purity of their roots. There is no impure emotion, there are facets of love that are ever contained in any other facets.

I don't know if I would call it a 'truer' pole, though I can say I used to think similarly (and I think see what you are trying to say). But I think they essentially emerge at the same time from the white light. I think the negative and positive pole are simultaneously and reflexively defined. Essentially, to the extent that you define self, you also define other-self, which potentiates the charge of polarity. If there is no self definition, there is also no other self definition either, and thus, no charge created, which is what you have in the octave density. And when there is no self, there is no givingness (radiation) or takingness (absorption), because those requires a relationship with other to realize.

I would call the violet side of the spectrum of light the radiating side, and the red side of the spectrum the absorbing side, i.e. kundalini system. The white light of the octave is neither, yet contains both in equal measure.

Nowadays, I'm of the opinion that both poles contain differing, but equally distorted/undistorted aspects of the One. Having said that, one side is focused on freeing others through truth, and the other side is focused on enslaving others through illusion. I think both polarities have advantages/disadvantages in terms of tapping into the energies of creation. For example, I think negative polarity has a supreme advantage in regards to working with and potentiating orange ray energies, while positive polarity has an substantial advantage in terms of indigo ray energies. Just as all negative beings become positive in sixth density, all beings essentially start off negative (self serving) in 2nd density and basically this is why. There is a bias towards the pole one is near to.

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes anagogy's post:
Infinite Unity
09-30-2016, 06:31 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-30-2016, 06:38 PM by Elros.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(09-30-2016, 05:20 PM)anagogy Wrote:  Nowadays, I'm of the opinion that both poles contain differing, but equally distorted/undistorted aspects of the One. Having said that, one side is focused on freeing others through truth, and the other side is focused on enslaving others through illusion. I think both polarities have advantages/disadvantages in terms of tapping into the energies of creation. For example, I think negative polarity has a supreme advantage in regards to working with and potentiating orange ray energies, while positive polarity has an substantial advantage in terms of indigo ray energies. Just as all negative beings become positive in sixth density, all beings essentially start off negative (self serving) in 2nd density and basically this is why. There is a bias towards the pole one is near to.

To take the bolded portion as an example. Can it not be rationalized that the other side enslaves through illusion as a mirror that they were and are enslaved by illusion?

I don't think 2nd density start off negative, they are mainly unawarely playing an on-going program while being shaped by external forces through cycles of time until it helps them reach self-awareness. By the time they reach that level, they already have stacked a pile of karma with nodes of lessons to learn and distill. When self-aware they gain the free will to make conscious choices upon their karmic direction. Canivorism, as an example, was probably implanted by STS group that presented it as a catalyst of reaching self-awareness through fear as a mean to diversify the experience of the creator of itself.

Here I only speak of polarity of emotions, as this is the prime focus of evolution within this one octave. There are many dualities which all are a form of separation that uses similar principles. Male and female, the eternal dance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Elros's post:
Infinite Unity
10-01-2016, 12:05 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(02-29-2016, 05:54 PM)Reaper Wrote:  Boxes be damned.

I agree with this for so many reasons.

The Ra Material is awesome stuff. But this existence is presumably infinite, and as such, our infinitesimally small views here in 3D can be nothing but limited. Why try to label one's self as STO or STS? One is what one is. I imagine the more efficacious approach would be to stay true to one's self and move forward according to what one resonates with. 

There are many judgments attached to the difference between STO and STS paralleling good/evil. This is based in part, I think, on projections derived from the current state of the world and social/economic/political concerns. For instance, a member of the Illuminati must be STS. I see other possibilities in that scenario. It isn't as simple as our human brains want to make it out to be.

In my opinion, thinking for one's self and stepping outside the box of humanity and its survival concerns—which are endlessly complicated and have the properties of quicksand—is the first step in evolution. It takes courage and confidence. There is no savior outside of one's self, in my opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Diana's post:
Infinite Unity
10-01-2016, 12:38 PM, (This post was last modified: 10-01-2016, 12:44 PM by anagogy.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(10-01-2016, 12:05 PM)Diana Wrote:  There are many judgments attached to the difference between STO and STS paralleling good/evil.

Such as?

I see a lot of people say this (like, as in, almost everyone says what you've just said here -- that is the group-think from my perspective), but I don't think it really logically follows. In fact, statements like these are why I'm starting to lean away from using the terms myself, which has nothing to do with the correlation being inaccurate, but rather the extraneous associations people give them which is an uphill battle at all times, but then, pushing back ignorance always is.

All good and evil ever was were descriptions of oppositely charged behaviors. Same goes for STS/STO, or radiation/absorption.

If somebody wants to attach judgments to those simple behavioral delineations other than than a clinical descriptive characteristic (i.e. make a judgment, instead of an observation) I feel like that is the fault of the person, rather than the concepts.

It's just an ancient way of addressing the concept of polarity versus a new age way of addressing the concept of polarity.

And you're right that our perspectives are limited, but putting nothing in a categorical box is equally ignorant to putting everything in a categorical box. In either situation, you learn nothing. It's really easy to just say, "Well we can't possibly understand, so we shouldn't try to figure this out, it doesn't fit into our limited preconceived boxes and minds", but frankly, I think it takes more courage to actually try to hash out the fine nuances of understanding.

It takes actual thinking to do that.  

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like anagogy's post:
Infinite Unity, Night Owl
10-01-2016, 09:35 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
@ Anagogy: I'm not sure how to respond to your comments. I feel you have completely misinterpreted my remarks, as well as insulted me (in a sideways manner). As for the misinterpretation, I will take responsibility for not being more clear.

So for now, I will let this be, and perhaps I can see it with fresh eyes later.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like Diana's post:
octavia, OpalE
10-01-2016, 10:36 PM, (This post was last modified: 10-01-2016, 11:35 PM by anagogy.)
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
(10-01-2016, 09:35 PM)Diana Wrote:  @ Anagogy: I'm not sure how to respond to your comments. I feel you have completely misinterpreted my remarks, as well as insulted me (in a sideways manner). As for the misinterpretation, I will take responsibility for not being more clear.

I don't see how what I said was an insult to you anymore than your proclamation that it is judgmental to equate good/evil with sto/sts was an insult towards me (in a sideways manner). However, I didn't choose to feel insulted by it. Instead, I simply sought clarification in regards to your proclamation (which you conveniently left out your logical reasoning for -- unless I just couldn't understand it).

I'm sorry that you have misinterpreted my remarks as some kind of attack. I was simply responding to what I perceived as a misconception.

This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-15-2017, 06:47 AM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
Father Bede Griffiths in Sun at Midnight and Radical Passion by Andrew Harvey Wrote:Many of the gurus now are not enlightened beings but black magicians, occult masters manipulating millions of seekers; what Jesus calls 'wolves in sheep's clothing'. All the serious mystical systems know of the existence of these occult powers, but modern seekers are naïve and uninformed and so vulnerable to them. These 'Masters' are not actually helping the Great Birth (of 4D) but working against it, aborting it.

Anyone up for an example? Maybe not a 'guru' in the original sense, but close enough: Benny Hinn (link goes to his website).



-`ღ´-

Compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-15-2017, 08:07 AM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?



Developing ability to connect to Source
My Book: http://www.thewarlockname.com
My Forum: http://www.anthroshaman.com
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes IndigoGeminiWolf's post:
Nía
01-19-2017, 04:04 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
Father Bede Griffiths Wrote:Many of the gurus now are not enlightened beings but black magicians, occult masters manipulating millions of seekers; what Jesus calls 'wolves in sheep's clothing'. All the serious mystical systems know of the existence of these occult powers, but modern seekers are naïve and uninformed and so vulnerable to them. These 'Masters' are not actually helping the Great Birth but working against it, aborting it.

Another example, this time more of a guru in the original sense: Mother Meera

[Image: Wolf-in-Sheeps-Clothing_zpsnkkg84et.jpg]

Compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-20-2017, 06:50 AM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
A slightly different path:

When 'Perfect' Beings Turn Bad: The Dangers of Becoming a Spiritual Teacher

Compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-20-2017, 07:21 PM,
RE: How Do STS's View Other Selves?
[Image: 577769_363817553666155_199077356806843_9...k=5gxLH3gK]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 3 users Like Aki "Hkelukka" Greus's post:
Elros, Nía, sriyantra




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)