+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Spiritual Development & Metaphysical Matters (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Contentions about 'Polarity' (/showthread.php?tid=12453)
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - spero - 02-02-2016
even tho "it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity" i would posit that polarization is reflected in the very specific tuning of the energy centres to access the gateway to intelligent infinity.
Any experience can function as a catalyst for work in multiple energy centres and no action has a polarity until it has been processed by a m/b/s complex toward the tuning of these centres toward the configuration typical of each polarity.
if effort is being made towards activation of green ray i.e. universal love, compassion, forgiveness; even in a balanced manner, i would count that as a step toward eventual positive polarisation since this centre seems to be heavily suppressed or denied in sts 4d and 5d.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - APeacefulWarrior - 02-02-2016
(02-02-2016, 11:25 AM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: I think THIS is the common misunderstanding. Polarity isn't "deliberately abandoned" in mid-6D, it's reconciled. There is a big difference. All of the densities leading up to mid-6th are REFINEMENT of polarity, so that in mid-6th D we CAN 'abandon' it once we truly understand its folly. However, that kind of abandonment of polarity is NOT what 3D is about. 3D is about making the choice over and over and over again, because that is how we act as Creators in this density.
I find it odd that you started by disagreeing with me but then pretty much restated with what I said. Deliberately "refining" polarity until it's seen as distortion and then discarding it is pretty much "deliberately abandoning." Just with slightly more exposition. I mean, Ra even explicitly said that he "seeks now without polarity" (64.6) in his own work aimed at refining his energetic balance.
And that reconciliation is coming to understand that the two polarities are both the same energy, and serving the same purposes.
As for 3D... who sez what 3D is "about?"
It's a tool. It's here to be used by those who have learned to use it. And once the choice is made, there's still the issue of what to do with that choice. I mean, I know some like Bashar tend to emphasize that we are literally making the same choices over and over and over, but on a practical level, most incarnated people aren't going to pull genuine face\heel turns too often in their lives. They'll pick a path and then head down it for a long while, doing work in the meantime.Sure, learning of love and picking a polarity to further the 4D transition is a strong focus of 3D activity here on Earth, but clearly -just from various stories Ra told- there are other reasons an entity might incarnate. For that matter, in a later session (91.35) he even gives specific advice for achieving a mental state without polarity, which is "full of the magic of the Logos."
So it certainly seems higher-density work\experimentation is on the table, for those who can manage to pull it off. Those who don't presumably learn different lessons.
And more broadly, I just don't really see much reason to suppose there are any hard restrictions on activity and learning attempts during Earthly incarnations. As long as the entity is veiled on this side -and therefore not violating any of the primary distortions- they can probably be used as a vehicle to experiment with just about anything, if they're down for it.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - AnthroHeart - 02-02-2016
Is becoming a martyr a certainty in 4D STO?
I am on psych meds, which keep me stable even if I experiment with higher energies. I just don't experience any metaphysical things.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Jade - 02-02-2016
I guess we just disagree on a small point. You said that polarity means less and less as we progress through the densities, but I disagree. If polarity was no matter to a mid-6D entity, then why would a social memory complex be so excited to incarnate on a planet where polarity is at its height? From what I understand of Ra, that higher density work/experimentation by the incarnated Wanderers specifically involves polarity.
Again, it's a small point of disagreement, but let's look at 64.6 in its entirety:
Quote:64.6 Questioner: Could you describe or tell me of rituals or technique used by Ra in seeking in the direction of service?
Ra: I am Ra. To speak of that which sixth-density social memory complexes labor within in order to advance is at best misprision of plain communication for much is lost in transmission of concept from density to density, and the discussion of sixth density is inevitably distorted greatly.
However, we shall attempt to speak to your query for it is an helpful one in that it allows us to express once again the total unity of creation. We seek the Creator upon a level of shared experience to which you are not privy and rather than surrounding ourselves in light we have become light. Our understanding is that there is no other material except light. Our rituals, as you may call them, are an infinitely subtle continuation of the balancing processes which you are now beginning to experience.
We seek now without polarity. Thus we do not invoke any power from without, for our search has become internalized as we become light/love and love/light. These are the balances we seek, the balances between compassion and wisdom which more and more allow our understanding of experience to be informed that we may come closer to the unity with the One Creator which we so joyfully seek.
Your rituals at your level of progress contain the concept of polarization and this is most central at your particular space/time.
My point was that there is a lot of argument that "Well, Ra is without polarity, so I'm going to be too, because it's just not that important!" but that's not the case. Ra is without polarity because they have worked millions of years to subtly refine and accept the negative polarity as part of the positive polarity. Neg 6D entities have to finally accept that their self-love is reflective of all-love because there is not other way. This is how polarity gets "abandoned." It's not about rising above polarity and refusing to participate. It's about working in a deliberate way to integrate both ends of the spectrum.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - APeacefulWarrior - 02-02-2016
(02-02-2016, 02:08 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: I guess we just disagree on a small point. You said that polarity means less and less as we progress through the densities, but I disagree. If polarity was no matter to a mid-6D entity, then why would a social memory complex be so excited to incarnate on a planet where polarity is at its height? From what I understand of Ra, that higher density work/experimentation by the incarnated Wanderers specifically involves polarity.
Why be excited to incarnate? Because catalyst is at its height, not just polarity. Catalyst drives and heightens all possible experiments and teaching\learning opportunities, whether they directly involve polarity or whatever else. And there's no doubt that many -probably even most- Wanderers are here to play with polarity, but that doesn't mean other options are totally off the table.
And also, the reason I said polarity matters less as the densities progress is that Ra specifically said (71.3) that "In fifth-density harvest, polarization has very little to do with harvestability." So if it matters very little to 5Ds transitioning to 6D, and is abandoned entirely by 6Ds seeking 7D, I would say that's a pretty clear progression of decreasing importance.
Quote:My point was that there is a lot of argument that "Well, Ra is without polarity, so I'm going to be too, because it's just not that important!" but that's not the case. Ra is without polarity because they have worked millions of years to subtly refine and accept the negative polarity as part of the positive polarity. Neg 6D entities have to finally accept that their self-love is reflective of all-love because there is not other way. This is how polarity gets "abandoned." It's not about rising above polarity and refusing to participate. It's about working in a deliberate way to integrate both ends of the spectrum.
OK, but I do honestly think I was pretty clear that I was talking about 6Ds specifically and what experiments a 6D might conduct with their Wanderers. And I said it was academic anyway. So I hardly think I'm corrupting innocent young souls here.
I mean, this is all stuff Ra talked about. He provided a range of materials suitable for many spiritual developmental stages, from 3D natives to 6D-derived Wanderers. If he had thought these concepts weren't appropriate for 3D ears, he wouldn't have said them. He could have simply deemed all knowledge of 6D too harmful to convey... but he didn't. So it's fair game for us to talk about as well, while letting others learn their own lessons as suits their own natures. And if someone does make the mistake of thinking they can leapfrog over initial polarization, and using that as an excuse to not bother trying, then after this life they'll get to try again. The Harvest is probably going to take hundreds of years, after all, which still leaves them a lot of chances for incarnations.
(Or who knows, maybe they'd even pull it off! And wouldn't that be a fascinating occurrence? After all, very little is truly impossible...)
Also -and perhaps this is nitpicking- but I'd say that it's not about accepting "negative polarity as part of positive polarity," but rather accepting that both are distorted-but-equal reflections of the more fundamental underlying love\light-light\love which is the raw stuff of intelligent infinity, equally present and equally harnessed in all activities both fair and foul. (And that which Ra now seeks to become, without polarity.)
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - AnthroHeart - 02-02-2016
(02-02-2016, 02:54 PM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote: Because catalyst is at its height, not just polarity.
You have to admit that this experience is VERY vivid. There are no uncertain terms of how we experience this reality.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - The_Tired_Philosopher - 02-02-2016
(02-02-2016, 03:14 AM)anagogy Wrote: ...
I'm not talking about polarity, are you seriously unable to see how you basically just called my reality not existent?
As I said, dogmatic, closedminded, cruel... Consider a different view. Plenum is at least kind enough to leave things open ended, I'm tired of this dark ages mentality some people here, talking about the Law of One, where Infinity is...Nested in its self...
You can't see how that allows for more than just a 6D Entity's OPINIONS of the nature of reality?
God, what is this, Rome in the time of Christ?
Negation of others. Seriously deplorable, in this place by supposedly openminded people.
Sad.
There is more to reality than polarity. A.
B. There is also more to polarity than left/right.
C. That is MY EXPERIENCE, Ra was Wrong for me.
D. You are not wrong, but please don't tell me I am in MY observations of MY reality.
If I need to quote you doing so, that too, is sad. Considering I like your advice its a shame how you just showed me how little you actually care about another's view... I'm not arguing anyone is wrong, Jesus Christ, I'm arguing that its not healthy for EVERYONE to see Polarity the way Ra throws it out there.
And not just that, but how do you KNOW your version of Reality is THE reality we all share?
Cause I don't for myself, I view polarity is existent but...
Ugh. How do I even explain the feeling of arguing with a Bible...
Pointless.
I'll just say this. Your reality and the Ra Material reality are not for everyone, be more open to another's views.
I'm out, because I'm tired of cognitive dissonance, I experience it too, please tell me how if you see it as mine comes in the form typically as denial.
Sorry if I'm experiencing such in your mind, but realize I am not saying you or Plenum or Ra are wrong.
I'll leave it up to yall to try and figure out what I am saying.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - spero - 02-02-2016
Anagogy is guilty of framing a personal interpretation of the universe (using the Ra material as a basis), in an absolute or unequivocal way, which raises people hackles when their experience differs. To be fair though TTP, u have done the same when u posited the Ra material as dangerous or the concepts therein (e.g. polarity) causing extreme pain or insanity, phrasing it as an absolute instead of subjective/personal experience.
We're all guilty of doing this at times.
Perhaps realizing the way we function as mirrors for each other might go some way in clarifying the situation.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - anagogy - 02-03-2016
(02-02-2016, 08:13 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: I'm not talking about polarity, are you seriously unable to see how you basically just called my reality not existent?
Are you serious? You think that my perspective, is somehow negating your perspective? I guess I thought it was basically obvious that everything everyone says on a internet forum is simply their interpretation of how things work. Like as in, it was so obvious that I didn't have to explicitly state it every time I make a forum post.
I'm not calling your reality non existent. I was just sharing my interpretation. I guess I mistakenly thought that was the whole point of a discussion forum. Silly me.
You do realize you are on a discussion forum that is mostly centered around the Law of One? And you freak out on me because I'm simply sharing my perspective on polarity? Nothing I say is negating your opinion, or forcing you in anyway to hold a perspective contrary to your own experience. Never once have I told you what to believe.
I could just as easily say your perspective is negating my perspective working by the logic you seem to be operating from here. Rather than get offended, you might try and instead calmly explain WHY you think polarity works differently than how Ra, and others here have explicated it. If you've already done so, I must have missed it.
So far all I've seen is appeals to emotion rather than explanations outlining any sort of supporting logic to your position.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - The_Tired_Philosopher - 02-03-2016
He's not guilty of anything as if to say he did something wrong. He negated my reality for his own views, it happens daily to me, but typically not here on B4, well, actually, that too has changed lately.
As for I, I can negate this material for the sake of my mental/emotional health for myself publicly to show that others don't need to remain in the infinite feedback loop of confused judgment leading into as I experienced, extreme emotional states ranging from psychosis, insanity, hatred, to decadence, bliss, and clarity, and when have I ever negated anyone else's version of it for them and not just myself?
When have I said something along the lines of "And see, I see this as a misconception, that there is some sort of "balance" found between positive and negative. There isn't" directly after someone has said their life and observations have showcased that exact opposite reality, that there IS?
No, truly, I invite this. Show me where I negate another's reality for my own version of it as being their reality...And I'm not too fond of being told I don't know about the mirroring mechanic of reality. I see myself in everyone, to my dismay, they do not see the same in me, so really, you took my line!
Maybe we all need a small reminder about how the whole mirroring mechanic works, since some of us do use it improperly to try and point out why someone is wrong when in reality, it's not the mirroring aspect causing it in my opinion, but just a pure normal catalytic occurrence. In this instance, I said A is from observation, and he said A Isn't as if my observation were nothing even worth being considered.
Not just that, but I will reiterate why Ra even does what they do, it is exactly why I do what I do in regards to calling out some issues with this Material.
To 'save' One, is enough.
As I said, and will continue to say so, this Material has driven some people to suicide (not much differently from a Biblical Material), if not in a worse way, a perpetual state of psychosis leading into insanity. That is, actually the complete ioss of one, the exact opposite of the desired outcome of this Material, which is also enough, One on either end, saved or lost, is enough to make me say something.
You are free to phrase things in absolutes, as you said, I do it too. But let me just say, once you say my reality is not real or actual, I WILL say something. I do not deny people's realities for them as was just done to me. I do not see how I have mirrored anything except judgment and the negation that came with it. I honestly just assumed I was upset with the immediate denial of my existing reality right after I described it. But if I am/was mirroring more than such, please tell me specifically because I have tried to see, and have not seen.
I invite this too. Transparency. Point out how I've mirrored. Maybe I'm experiencing cognitive dissonance, so I ask you to please point it out to me because I'm not a fan of it, I like to break down those walls, not sit behind them.
I have also said the Ra Material is right AND wrong, or as it goes; right/wrong, and that people, from Min, to Ana who have opinions that differ from mine in observation are not wrong, because chances are that their opinions/views are momentarily, concurrently alongside mine, probably true. Their reality is just as real as mine. Both as the same being experienced uniquely in different ways. For some they see only confusion. I do not share that view, in that disorder of 'confusion' I have seen order, aka dis/order. If this is not possible in another's reality then all I am actually mirroring is their negation of my reality, by negating their negation. (Two negatives make a Positive mathematically ironically is why I do this.)
Yet my posts will and have been dissected and argued against, not specifically by Ana in all honesty. But I digress, I'm not arguing anyone is wrong or right, I'm sharing my view. I'm also typically the one defending my view because of others' views, hence yes, if I am negated I have to 'de-negate' myself, that mirror effect is perfect, so I've decided to balance my recently defending myself often with some offense, of which comes in the form of mirroring what it is that has just caused me discomfort.
But beyond judgment and negation, I fail to see how else I have mirrored in a way as to make it point-out-able as if my opinion isn't valid. Please tell me what you see, I am actually positively in an emotional sense, curious and would like to know please.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - The_Tired_Philosopher - 02-03-2016
"And see, I see this as a misconception, that there is some sort of "balance" found between positive and negative. There isn't"
Or I'm overreacting to this one phrase as it alone basically undid my entire view as not being.
I'd call that negation, I am being serious. And I invite you to have just as much scrutiny against me because I will always tell you that your view is proper, and I do respect it, but you really did just go right out of the way calling my reality not being.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - anagogy - 02-03-2016
Dude, that is not someone "negating your reality". That is someone operating from a certain logic, and seeing someone else make a logical error (from their point of view), and then attempting to correct the logic. Whether or not you agree with the logic, it is EXACTLY like watching someone figuring out a math equation and you thought they forgot to add the remainder. Now whether you did or did not is a matter of opinion. Perhaps your math is better than mine, and if it is, POINT it out, and EXPLAIN it.
But that person, who points that out, was only trying to help, not hurt you.
You're overreacting. We're simply having a discussion. If you disagree with something, offer a LOGICAL explanation for your perspective. I mean, we could sit here until we are blue in the face making sweeping statements about HOW things work. But it doesn't mean anything if there is no logic to support our frameworks. I myself am happy to calmly and dispassionately explain the logic of any of my perspectives, are you willing to do the same for your views?
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - APeacefulWarrior - 02-03-2016
No offense, TTP, but you seem to be the only one here taking this discussion so personally. I mean, Jade and I clearly have some pretty different concepts of polarity and unity, but we can still just discuss the matter without anyone getting too upset. (At least I certainly hope not!) When Jade said she thought my view was a misconception, I didn't get upset or defensive, I just wrote a post explaining in more detail why I thought that way. And then she explained her own views in more detail, and soforth.
And then whoever else wanders into this thread and sees our discussion gets multiple points of view on the matter, and has more opportunity to form or refine their own views, so absolutely regardless of which of us is "right" (or neither, or both) we're providing service via learning/teaching opportunities.
I honestly don't believe anyone here is deliberately trying to oppress you or negate your reality. Everyone has different points of view on these things, and they're not always going to be compatible. And since we're so heavily veiled that the actual truth is basically beyond our reach, all we really have are these discussions and our own struggling attempts to understand concepts that are pretty far above our heads.
We're all confused down here. Talking these things out in a relatively impersonal manner is one of the only tools we have to even maybe get a handle on some of these big picture matters.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - spero - 02-03-2016
perhaps guilty was the wrong word to use. i just meant sometimes when we are explaining our viewpoints we use definitive language out of habit and it can rub people up the wrong way and appear authoritarian or dismissive of alternate viewpoints. part habit, projection and assumption rolled into one.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - rva_jeremy - 02-03-2016
(02-02-2016, 08:13 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: I'm not talking about polarity, are you seriously unable to see how you basically just called my reality not existent?
If you don't stand up for your reality and your lived experience, you can't get mad when others don't. It's all a mystery and none of us have all the answers. Ra wouldn't want you to doubt yourself just because they said stuff; don't do so because somebody tells you what Ra said.
I'm all for going beyond the Ra material; it takes a lot of confidence and self-respect to step outside the model Ra provides and discover the larger reality on your own terms.
All I'm saying is: if it hurts that people don't validate your reality, maybe look at that and ask yourself why. You don't need anybody to certify your approach. Love and light, man.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - rva_jeremy - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 01:09 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: He negated my reality for his own views, it happens daily to me, but typically not here on B4, well, actually, that too has changed lately.Why do you think that happens?
One thing I'd offer: other people negating things I hold to be "real" is often the way I find out what _I_ really believe in / care about / know with confidence. In other words: why isn't it just catalyst for growth?
I'm not saying you should put up with people being rude. When people aren't listening to you and taking you seriously, value yourself enough to move on, is my advice. Hey, it's something I'm learning, too: that to genuinely take responsibility for our truths means that we believe them for ourselves, not because others allow us to.
You're almost there -- just take what the others say, leave what doesn't resonate, and move on. If they are being disrespectful, then playing into it is only wasting your time.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - The_Tired_Philosopher - 02-03-2016
I don't know.
Logic seems to not exist here anymore once you speak of polarity. I am not contending polarity, I'm expanding on it, you want logic and proof? Come merger with me and experience my reality through my perspective. I couldn't properly show or tell you in words beyond what I already have in other threads.
Figure it out people, I won't spell it out for you all (again). Its not my place to learn for you all. If you can't see it then obviously it won't be apparent. That is actually one of the mechanics of Reality, which is why Ra says we should look for Love, it is there even if unseen, it exists.
As do I, and the balance underlying positive and negative, both come from the same source. Its imbalanced to assume one way does not contain in its entirety the other way. You wouldn't have falsely positive societies as also described (of which were actually negative but believed positive) if this weren't true.
Does a monk sit in silence to experience positive or negative? If all is one, why is Polarity exempt of this...?
I don't need validation, I just want to stop being told my reality is wrong, in any sense from illogical to impossible. Its not.
Thanks guys.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Minyatur - 02-03-2016
I think anagogy explained it in a better manner than I did by focusing on the energitic aspect of it.
To make an analogy, someone could argue that electricity should not be defined as having positive and negative charges because we can make myriads of things with their potential that are neither positive or negative in themselves. While this is true it does not change that the mechanics of electricity hold polarized opposite charges to allow these myriads of things to be.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Jade - 02-03-2016
TTP, what appears to me to be happening is anagogy is saying things to you that resonate on one level, but do not see as reality on another level, and therefore you are allowing his words to "negate" your beliefs. It IS possible for another to negate your beliefs, the thing is that you have to allow it to happen. You are giving anagogy (and others) too much power. You have the power. Your reality is yours and no one else can negate it for you.
It's possible that you're misinterpretation anagogy's attempts at integration for negation. He's trying to bridge one (destructive) belief of yours with another, more healing belief. This is a very hard process and why you feel "negated" - it's part of what we usually refer to as 'destroying the ego', letting go of the views of reality that are deeply ingrained within our being that have served us for a long time. It's a long, important process to examine these views, because our thoughts do create the reality that we see. So of course, your reality is what you have experienced, solely because your own thoughts have led you there. So yes, that is your reality. Others are just attempting to help you shift that reality to one that you might find more pleasing. The level of negation that that requires of your old reality is completely up to you.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Jade - 02-03-2016
(02-02-2016, 02:54 PM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote:(02-02-2016, 02:08 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: I guess we just disagree on a small point. You said that polarity means less and less as we progress through the densities, but I disagree. If polarity was no matter to a mid-6D entity, then why would a social memory complex be so excited to incarnate on a planet where polarity is at its height? From what I understand of Ra, that higher density work/experimentation by the incarnated Wanderers specifically involves polarity.
Why be excited to incarnate? Because catalyst is at its height, not just polarity. Catalyst drives and heightens all possible experiments and teaching\learning opportunities, whether they directly involve polarity or whatever else. And there's no doubt that many -probably even most- Wanderers are here to play with polarity, but that doesn't mean other options are totally off the table.
And also, the reason I said polarity matters less as the densities progress is that Ra specifically said (71.3) that "In fifth-density harvest, polarization has very little to do with harvestability." So if it matters very little to 5Ds transitioning to 6D, and is abandoned entirely by 6Ds seeking 7D, I would say that's a pretty clear progression of decreasing importance.
Well, we may have to agree to disagree then. Just because 5th density isn't judged for harvest based on 3rd density polarity criterion doesn't mean that polarity is less important in 5D. Whatever the judge of violet ray energy that 5th density harvest requires, the work required to get there is fueled by the polarizing actions of others. If others didn't polarize, the other densities wouldn't have "work", ie whatever they have to do to manifest their form of higher density harvest criteria.
Quote:Quote:My point was that there is a lot of argument that "Well, Ra is without polarity, so I'm going to be too, because it's just not that important!" but that's not the case. Ra is without polarity because they have worked millions of years to subtly refine and accept the negative polarity as part of the positive polarity. Neg 6D entities have to finally accept that their self-love is reflective of all-love because there is not other way. This is how polarity gets "abandoned." It's not about rising above polarity and refusing to participate. It's about working in a deliberate way to integrate both ends of the spectrum.
OK, but I do honestly think I was pretty clear that I was talking about 6Ds specifically and what experiments a 6D might conduct with their Wanderers. And I said it was academic anyway. So I hardly think I'm corrupting innocent young souls here.
I mean, this is all stuff Ra talked about. He provided a range of materials suitable for many spiritual developmental stages, from 3D natives to 6D-derived Wanderers. If he had thought these concepts weren't appropriate for 3D ears, he wouldn't have said them. He could have simply deemed all knowledge of 6D too harmful to convey... but he didn't. So it's fair game for us to talk about as well, while letting others learn their own lessons as suits their own natures. And if someone does make the mistake of thinking they can leapfrog over initial polarization, and using that as an excuse to not bother trying, then after this life they'll get to try again. The Harvest is probably going to take hundreds of years, after all, which still leaves them a lot of chances for incarnations.
(Or who knows, maybe they'd even pull it off! And wouldn't that be a fascinating occurrence? After all, very little is truly impossible...)
Also -and perhaps this is nitpicking- but I'd say that it's not about accepting "negative polarity as part of positive polarity," but rather accepting that both are distorted-but-equal reflections of the more fundamental underlying love\light-light\love which is the raw stuff of intelligent infinity, equally present and equally harnessed in all activities both fair and foul. (And that which Ra now seeks to become, without polarity.)
I think maybe I just see polarity as a more encompassing word than you do. I consider all the "work" that one might do in 3D to be involved with polarity. Catalyst is created because of polarity. To me, that says polarity is important, even to a 6D wanderer who is almost entirely polarized into unity, because there is a reason why they incarnated here.
Let's look at Ra's balancing steps to become a healer, which would be advice for Wanderers. This is the first step:
Quote:Ra: To begin to master the concept of mental discipline it is necessary to examine the self. The polarity of your dimension must be internalized.
By incarnating, we accept the responsibility of polarity, and must work with it, and internalize it. Of course, the outcome being that you must recognize that all things are within, and the point being that this is more easily and quickly achieved through one polarity than the other.
I mean, I get it. There is no polarity. There is only unity. There is only one of us here. But I'm currently in a system where that has been artificially altered, so I have to work within that system. I mean, I could sit in a cave and meditate all day to unify everyone in oneness. Instead, I obviously chose to be a waitress and a forum organizer to examine interactions with others (polarity) in detail. I mean, if I were some highfalutin 6th density wanderer, and I incarnated here and deliberately chose not to polarize, I would depolarize, which would in theory be a problem. Of course like you said it's not, because everyone will harvest in their time, but from that vantage point I don't think it's the most desired outcome, to be "swept into the maelstrom".
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Minyatur - 02-03-2016
From the way I see things, to be exempt of the system we exist within one would need to suceed in harvesting negatively all the way through the Octave.
To put this another way, rather than liberating in harmony the individualization within the Logos, one would need to asborb the Logos from within it's individualization.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - AnthroHeart - 02-03-2016
I think it's easier to polarize in our thoughts than it is to polarize in our action. But both can potentially be STO.
I think that getting mad at someone who upsets us isn't polarizing STO. We should get to where we only see love in every situation.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - anagogy - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 11:47 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: Does a monk sit in silence to experience positive or negative? If all is one, why is Polarity exempt of this...?
Well, from my perspective, in general I would say the monk sits in silence to become more aware of the nature of reality. You might even say to become more aware of his or her oneness with the universe. From my perspective, that would seem to be a positively polarized act because it results in a greater sense of connection or empathy with his or her fellow man and the universe in general.
Now, if the meditation resulted in detachment from others, rather than connection, I would liken it more to a negatively polarized action.
If it neither increased connection with others, nor decreased connection with others, it would seem to my reckoning to be a neutral act. Neutral actions can be done, but if we are to take Ra's words at face value they don't appear to increase collective unity or personal power, being unpolarized actions. Thus, from that vantage point, it would seem they are largely pointless in a spiritual sense since they do not take you closer to the creator. But if one is not interested in progressing beyond this density's vibrational range, there is no rule saying you can't just do whatever whether it its magnetically positive or negative.
"The catalyst, and all catalyst, is designed to offer experience. This experience in your density may be loved and accepted or it may be controlled. These are the two paths. When neither path is chosen the catalyst fails in its design and the entity proceeds until catalyst strikes it which causes it to form a bias towards acceptance and love or separation and control. There is no lack of space/time in which this catalyst may work."
"The Law of One has as one of its primal distortions the free will distortion, thus each entity is free to accept, reject, or ignore the mind/body/spirit complexes about it and ignore the creation itself."
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Aion - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 02:22 PM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: I think it's easier to polarize in our thoughts than it is to polarize in our action. But both can potentially be STO.
I think that getting mad at someone who upsets us isn't polarizing STO. We should get to where we only see love in every situation.
I actually disagree. I don't think anger or such 'negative' emotions are polarizing in themselves. I also think STO and STS works differently. If you were to feel upset with someone and honestly expressed that without an intent to harm, that is about as STO as you can get without anger. The STS would bottle it up, not let it out and deceive the other that everything is fine until the anger can be used to that person's advantage against the other.
So feeling and letting those feelings flow even if they are hard emotions like anger or fear I believe is much more positively oriented than any sort of repression.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Aion - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 02:08 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: From the way I see things, to be exempt of the system we exist within one would need to suceed in harvesting negatively all the way through the Octave.
To put this another way, rather than liberating in harmony the individualization within the Logos, one would need to asborb the Logos from within it's individualization.
Except on the octave level time/space and space/time literally permeate eachother and there is no difference between inner and outer. Either way they're touching the same thing and I have yet to see anybody give any reasonable explanation as to how a negative would avoid the need to repolarize in 6D. Lots of nifty word concepts and ideation but nothing that holds up to logic.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Minyatur - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 02:56 PM)Aion Wrote:(02-03-2016, 02:08 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: From the way I see things, to be exempt of the system we exist within one would need to suceed in harvesting negatively all the way through the Octave.
To put this another way, rather than liberating in harmony the individualization within the Logos, one would need to asborb the Logos from within it's individualization.
Except on the octave level time/space and space/time literally permeate eachother and there is no difference between inner and outer. Either way they're touching the same thing and I have yet to see anybody give any reasonable explanation as to how a negative would avoid the need to repolarize in 6D. Lots of nifty word concepts and ideation but nothing that holds up to logic.
Well this was meant as food for thought. I see it as a strong enough rejection of the Logos from within Itself.
I believe you have said in a thread that you believe it is the honor of a single entity to harvest negatively from this Octave. Compared it to Galactus if I remember correctly.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Aion - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 03:10 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote:(02-03-2016, 02:56 PM)Aion Wrote:(02-03-2016, 02:08 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: From the way I see things, to be exempt of the system we exist within one would need to suceed in harvesting negatively all the way through the Octave.
To put this another way, rather than liberating in harmony the individualization within the Logos, one would need to asborb the Logos from within it's individualization.
Except on the octave level time/space and space/time literally permeate eachother and there is no difference between inner and outer. Either way they're touching the same thing and I have yet to see anybody give any reasonable explanation as to how a negative would avoid the need to repolarize in 6D. Lots of nifty word concepts and ideation but nothing that holds up to logic.
Well this was meant as food for thought. I see it as a strong enough rejection of the Logos from within Itself.
I believe you have said in a thread that you believe it is the honor of a single entity to harvest negatively from this Octave. Compared it to Galactus if I remember correctly.
Yes, I have said that before but I believe that entity still goes through the release process because you can't move through the gateway octave so long as you hold a polarized charge. However, I don't view it as any sort of rejection, because it is a total realization of all within. The honour of that negative entity is to discover the complete Logos within and at that moment the entity no longer perceives separation between self and other self and instantly all others come to be identified as solely the self. However, because of so much self-orientation and study of love and wisdom through 4D and 5D that at that moment the love for self suddenly encompasses all.
This is what I see as the successful candidate. Those many who will fail will cling to their separation from others and be unable to absorb all in to the love of self and so need to go the outside route of releasing negative polarity to finish in positive. The successful one will encounter the positive force within which matches their negative polarity. This sounds easy in concept, but the nature of mind necessary to follow this path is one which must be able to maintain its integrity. I think if anything this idea is more dangerous in the sense that people might start to try and either just end up negatively polarized or go insane.
By juxtaposition, it can then be seen that all of those who progress on the positive end also eventually discover the negative charge within and so balance. I believe that is the process of moving in to 6D. However, positive goes in to it already well-versed in the process and modes of integration.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Minyatur - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 03:22 PM)Aion Wrote:(02-03-2016, 03:10 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote:(02-03-2016, 02:56 PM)Aion Wrote:(02-03-2016, 02:08 PM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: From the way I see things, to be exempt of the system we exist within one would need to suceed in harvesting negatively all the way through the Octave.
To put this another way, rather than liberating in harmony the individualization within the Logos, one would need to asborb the Logos from within it's individualization.
Except on the octave level time/space and space/time literally permeate eachother and there is no difference between inner and outer. Either way they're touching the same thing and I have yet to see anybody give any reasonable explanation as to how a negative would avoid the need to repolarize in 6D. Lots of nifty word concepts and ideation but nothing that holds up to logic.
Well this was meant as food for thought. I see it as a strong enough rejection of the Logos from within Itself.
I believe you have said in a thread that you believe it is the honor of a single entity to harvest negatively from this Octave. Compared it to Galactus if I remember correctly.
Yes, I have said that before but I believe that entity still goes through the release process because you can't move through the gateway octave so long as you hold a polarized charge. However, I don't view it as any sort of rejection, because it is a total realization of all within. The honour of that negative entity is to discover the complete Logos within and at that moment the entity no longer perceives separation between self and other self and instantly all others come to be identified as solely the self. However, because of so much self-orientation and study of love and wisdom through 4D and 5D that at that moment the love for self suddenly encompasses all.
This is what I see as the successful candidate. Those many who will fail will cling to their separation from others and be unable to absorb all in to the love of self and so need to go the outside route of releasing negative polarity to finish in positive. The successful one will encounter the positive force within which matches their negative polarity. This sounds easy in concept, but the nature of mind necessary to follow this path is one which must be able to maintain its integrity. I think if anything this idea is more dangerous in the sense that people might start to try and either just end up negatively polarized or go insane.
By juxtaposition, it can then be seen that all of those who progress on the positive end also eventually discover the negative charge within and so balance. I believe that is the process of moving in to 6D. However, positive goes in to it already well-versed in the process and modes of integration.
Would you say this is an unlikely outcome or an inivitable one?
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - Night Owl - 02-03-2016
Thanks Plenum for such a nice thread. I find those kind of threads to be the best kind because these are the ones where everyone seems to colaborate in finding the best possible answers and thoughts to constructive subjects. If there is a place on the internet or on earth where there is such an awesome amount of love and wisdom united in a single place please let me know. You are all so awesome for sharing those thoughts. Those who have shared their thoughts here so far please continue to do so as much as possible. I can tell you the OIC is proud of you.
RE: Contentions about 'Polarity' - AnthroHeart - 02-03-2016
(02-03-2016, 09:45 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: Those who have shared their thoughts here so far please continue to do so as much as possible. I can tell you the OIC is proud of you.
Thank you for that. I was wondering if my posts are somehow intrusive or redundant.