(03-04-2016, 10:31 AM)Minyatur Wrote: From your logic I should perhaps channel 6D members of the Orion Group to extend my knowledge of the positive path. Asking only those who never dwelled in it and only have seen it from afar.

In regards to the negative path, yes I believe my soul does have much more knowledge and experience of it than those of Ra, just as an understanding and love for those who are currently within it.

(03-04-2016, 10:39 AM)anagogy Wrote:

(03-04-2016, 10:31 AM)Minyatur Wrote: From your logic I should perhaps channel 6D members of the Orion Group to extend my knowledge of the positive path. Asking only those who never dwelled in it and only have seen it from afar.

In regards to the negative path, yes I believe my soul does have much more knowledge and experience of it than those of Ra, just as an understanding and love for those who are currently within it.

Are you saying you are negatively polarized?

(03-04-2016, 10:44 AM)Minyatur Wrote: Not as of now and I found no desire to move toward the negative path within myself either but it seems like quite a major aspect of my background which makes up what I am now.

(03-05-2016, 05:49 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: Hey GW, I'm not 100% I agree with Scott's interpretation, there. I feel like Don asked quite a bit about the negative polarity without Ra taking issue (I remember making mental notes to check what Ra said about the "tuning" of each session this last read through, and it didn't seem that they would get detuned just discussing the negative polarity). It's really more the transient, specific information that depolarized the contact. Now if Don had specifically been asking questions with the intent to evolve on the negative path, another entity would have likely replaced Ra. But I think Ra was plenty happy to delineate the polarities, especially in context, to further the growth of spiritual seeking.

(02-28-2016, 11:46 AM)neutral333 Wrote:   Do they have a perverted or reverse view of human development and see destruction as the more expedient way to return to the Creator?  Are they so absorbed in their self to the point where they see others as their play things to get more for their self?  Is it simply a feeling of insecurity? In the words of Seinfeld, "What is the deal?"  What are your thoughts?

Quote:32.2 - ...Can you tell me the difference between orange- and yellow-ray activation? I am going to work up from red ray right on through the violet, and we covered red ray, so what’s the difference between orange- and yellow-ray activation?

Ra: I am Ra. The orange ray is that influence or vibratory pattern wherein the mind/body/spirit expresses its power on an individual basis. Thus power over individuals may be seen to be orange ray. This ray has been quite intense among your peoples on an individual basis. You may see in this ray the treating of other-selves as non-entities, slaves, or chattel, thus giving other-selves no status whatever.

The yellow ray is a focal and very powerful ray and concerns the entity in relation to, shall we say, groups, societies, or large numbers of mind/body/spirit complexes. This orange — we correct ourselves — this yellow-ray vibration is at the heart of bellicose actions in which one group of entities feel the necessity and right of dominating other groups of entities and bending their wills to the wills of the masters. The negative path, as you would call it, uses a combination of the yellow ray and the orange ray in its polarization patterns.

Andrew Harvey Wrote:Rio will accomplish absolutely nothing because you do-gooders are so naive about the real world. Most of you that I have met truly believe that if the CEOs – like me for instance – really knew what harm their corporate policies were doing, they would rend their Armani suits, fling out their Rolex-wreathed arms, burst into tears and change. This is madness, it shows how little you dare to know about what is really going on. And how can you even begin to be effective until you understand what you’re up against?

Let me tell you what you’re up against. You’re up against people like me. I know exactly what my company is doing, and what devastation it is causing to thousands of lives. I should know, I’m running it. I know and I do not care. I’ve decided I want a grand, gold-plated lifestyle and the perks and jets and houses that go with it, and I will do anything – bend the law, have people 'removed', bribe local government officials, you name it, to get what I want. I know, too, that none of my shareholders care a rat’s ass what I do or how I do it, providing I keep them swimming in cash.

[…]

The seekers that I meet are, frankly, 'bliss bunnies', about as useful in the real world as a rubber ball would be in a war.

[…]

This bliss-bunnyhood of seekers and the offensive self-righteousness of activists make it very easy for people like me to control the world. I know too, by the way, that the dark forces I play with are also playing with me. […] I’m willing to pay that price in return for the pleasure of being able to afford this restaurant. In return for being able to ring up the President of the United States on my personal phone in front of houseguests just to impress them. Am I getting through to you?

(02-28-2016, 11:46 AM)neutral333 Wrote: As one who chooses to identify as STO, I can see other entities as sparks of the One Infinite Creator, as other versions of myself, as souls at various states of consciousness all seeking to reconnect with that creative infinity, etc.

I believe a fundamental, perhaps the most fundamental, chasm between STO and STS is the way in which others are viewed and their relationship to self.  When I try to fathom what STS sees when they view others, I have a difficult time - especially with the 4D and 5D.  Do they come completely from a place of fear where they see every other entity as a threat?  Do they have a destructive view towards creation and therefore try to get others to self-destruct?  Do they have a perverted or reverse view of human development and see destruction as the more expedient way to return to the Creator?  Are they so absorbed in their self to the point where they see others as their play things to get more for their self?  Is it simply a feeling of insecurity? In the words of Seinfeld, "What is the deal?"  What are your thoughts?

(05-10-2016, 03:32 AM)facettes Wrote: Just an example I came across...

Andrew Harvey Wrote:In the early '90s I was at a meeting in New York with several of the leading organizers of what was to be the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio. A quiet, handsome, well-dressed man in his 40s took me aside afterward and introduced himself as the head of a major agribusiness corporation. He said, "I have something very important to tell you, and I will pay for the joy of telling it to you by offering you lunch."

At lunch the next day, he cut to the chase: "Rio will accomplish absolutely nothing because you do-gooders are so naive about the real world. Most of you that I have met truly believe that if the CEOs—like me, for instance—really knew what harm their corporate policies were doing, they would rend their Armani suits, fling out their Rolex-wreathed arms, burst into tears, and change. This is madness and shows how little you dare to know about what is really going on. And how can you even begin to be effective until you understand what you are up against?

"Let me tell you what you are up against. You are up against people like me. I know exactly what my company is doing and what devastation it is causing to thousands of lives. I should know; I am running it. I know and I do not care. I have decided I want a grand gold-plated lifestyle and the perks and jets and houses that go with it and I will do anything—bend the law, have people 'removed,' bribe local governmental officials, you name it—to get what I want. I know, too, that none of my shareholders care a rat's ass what I do or how I do it, providing I keep them swimming in cash.

"I said that you were up against people like me. That is true in one sense, but not in another. Because the truth is that I am in you too. A part of you is like me, just as ruthless and dedicated to your own selfish agenda. But you can dress up this ruthlessness as your 'mission' and never unmask the lust for power that might be lurking behind your righteous facade.

"What limits all so-called seekers and activists that I meet is that they both shy away from the full realization of the powers of the dark. The seekers I meet are, frankly, 'bliss bunnies,' about as useful in the real world as a rubber ball would be in a war. The activists I know enjoy denouncing others but aren't at all in the business of unmasking their own destructiveness, or the self-destructiveness of their dreary and banal self-righteousness.

"The bliss-bunnyhood of seekers and the offensive self-righteousness of activists make it very easy for people like me to control the world. I know too, by the way, that the dark forces I play with are playing with me. I am under no illusion that I will not someday have to pay the price. Don't the French say, 'The devil has no friends'? I'm willing to pay that price in return for the pleasure of being able to afford this restaurant, in return for being able to ring up the president of the United States in front of house-guests to impress them. Am I getting through to you?"

(02-28-2016, 11:46 AM)neutral333 Wrote: As one who chooses to identify as STO, I can see other entities as sparks of the One Infinite Creator, as other versions of myself, as souls at various states of consciousness all seeking to reconnect with that creative infinity, etc.

I believe a fundamental, perhaps the most fundamental, chasm between STO and STS is the way in which others are viewed and their relationship to self.  When I try to fathom what STS sees when they view others, I have a difficult time - especially with the 4D and 5D.  Do they come completely from a place of fear where they see every other entity as a threat?  Do they have a destructive view towards creation and therefore try to get others to self-destruct?  Do they have a perverted or reverse view of human development and see destruction as the more expedient way to return to the Creator?  Are they so absorbed in their self to the point where they see others as their play things to get more for their self?  Is it simply a feeling of insecurity? In the words of Seinfeld, "What is the deal?"  What are your thoughts?

(08-10-2016, 02:48 PM)anagogy Wrote: What would it mean for something to be "evil"?

Or "good" for that matter?

I have mixed feelings about it.

It has become very popular in new age circles to say "there is no evil", but if there is no evil, there is no good either. But I can't really get on board with that, because there are certainly actions that I feel are more good, harmonious, and virtuous than other actions. Generally, those things I interpret as "good" are selfless in nature. And the same goes in reverse for things that I consider to be "evil", they are generally extremely selfish actions in nature. To speak in a simultaneously more specific and also more broad context, there are definitely actions which are more consonant with wholeness than other actions. Truly democratic actions, done for the greatest amount of people, are more in alignment with wholeness than those actions that cater to less (in a deliberate sense, I'm not talking about random occurrences or unforeseen consequences here).

So I guess, at the end of the day, while it may sound very zen to say there is no evil, and/or that no one is evil, I feel like it ultimately boils down to just a meaningless game of word substitution. To be negatively polarized is to be extremely selfish, to be positively polarized is to be extremely unselfish (in terms of intent/desire -- outcomes ultimately cannot be known and could be for better or for worse).

So I think the issue is more that people have emotionally charged feelings about the words "good" and "evil".

The problem, as I see it, is not that some people are good or evil, it is the notion that the creator frowns upon the choice of evil, or selfishness. It is perfectly valid choice of evolution in its nonjudgmental eyes. Evil and good is just a dichotomy of oppositely charged behaviors with regard to other selves, just as the words "negative polarity" and "positive polarity" are. And just like talking about polarity, they have no definition except in comparison to another relative action. So you can't look at any behavior and say that it is pure evil or pure good. You can only say, "it is more (or less) evil (or good) than another specified deliberate action."  There has to be a comparison to measure the charge of the act.

It could be argued that the words good and evil are imprecise. I'll grant you that. But really, so are "negatively polarized" and "positively polarized". But even so, I can't deny the obvious correlation.

So is there good and evil? In my opinion, there most certainly is.

(08-10-2016, 03:17 PM)Minyatur Wrote: Good and evil falls when you understand that the energy behind what you can consider the greatest good is the same energy that is behind what you would consider the greatest evil. The same will is focused unto different states of balance with different surrounding parameters, yet never is unlike any of the two poles.

(08-10-2016, 03:17 PM)Minyatur Wrote: The negative polarity is not extreme selfishness, it seems that way to the external eyes that understand not it's cause and effect, that perceives not that it contains the exact same seflessness that the positive polarity sheds light upon. In the same manner, the positive polarity contains the same selfishness that the negative polarity sheds light upon, except that it is expressed positively within paramaters that allow this expression.

(08-10-2016, 03:17 PM)Minyatur Wrote: Polarity already fufills the role of measure fo comparison of the charge of the act, good and evil are something other born from a non-understanding of these charges.

(02-28-2016, 11:46 AM)neutral333 Wrote: When I try to fathom what STS sees when they view others, I have a difficult time - especially with the 4D and 5D.  Do they come completely from a place of fear where they see every other entity as a threat?  Do they have a destructive view towards creation and therefore try to get others to self-destruct?  Do they have a perverted or reverse view of human development and see destruction as the more expedient way to return to the Creator?  Are they so absorbed in their self to the point where they see others as their play things to get more for their self?  Is it simply a feeling of insecurity? In the words of Seinfeld, "What is the deal?"  What are your thoughts?