+- 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: Learning for Another Self (/showthread.php?tid=12397)
Learning for Another Self - Plenum - 01-20-2016
what do you think is behind this concept?
is it even possible to actually learn for another self?
is there an inbuilt assumption or arrogance behind such an attempt?
is it about giving someone the answers (the answers you arrived at) before they asked the question for themself?
thanks for you thoughts
RE: Learning for Another Self - Verum Occultum - 01-20-2016
It might be as simple as just offering what that other self needed and being so immersed in the moment that it feels you learned for them.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Ankh - 01-20-2016
(01-20-2016, 09:36 AM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: what do you think is behind this concept?
is it even possible to actually learn for another self?
is there an inbuilt assumption or arrogance behind such an attempt?
is it about giving someone the answers (the answers you arrived at) before they asked the question for themself?
thanks for you thoughts
I can imagine that there are two things to consider. One is if aliens would arrive, and people would look at them in awe, listening to each and every word they would have to say. If aliens would say - love each other, take care of each other, and serve each other - people would try to do that, without arriving to this conclusion themselves. If aliens would say that some are better than others among us, and that those who are better will rule those who are not, than people would fight for that. There will be probably some disharmony, but it's the hallmark of negative polarity. In each case, people would try to polarize without this coming within themselves. Second thought that I had is that since infinity is all that there is, there are infinite ways into arriving to an answer, and each and every one of these ways are equally important to the infinite intelligence in Its ways of getting to know Itself. Therefore, giving someone an answer to a question, whether asked or not, means that this entity who asked question, never opened the door. What meaning would it then be with the Creation? If all the questions had the same answer? Besides, it would be extremely boring.
Just my 2 cents.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Jade - 01-23-2016
I think it's possible. Let's use a school analogy.
Let's get two young buddies in school. Starting at grade 2, their interest in school splits - one child does well, and the other child prefers not to pay attention. Being friends, the child who does well helps his pal. Somewhere along the line, a threshhold gets crossed where the child not paying attention relies more and more upon his friend to help him through his work. This goes well until high school, where the buddies get split up and go to two different schools. How is the child who had their friend carry them through their work? Sure, it was an endeavor in love, but now the child that hasn't learned any skills on its own is at a handicap - not only does it not really have the skills it needs to make it in a higher caliber of testing, it also doesn't have the basic skills that one gains from self-discovery and self-worth of learning things on your own. It will most likely have to go through and relearn a lot of what it could have learned on its own in the first place.
I think our veil specifically is about using ignorance as a driver of will to discover more. So, the use of one's will to look inward for answers is a very important thing to cultivate. "Learning for others" IE teaching them to not learn for themselves is possible, I believe. And it's infringement. At that point you basically have a puppet you are feeding. This is how a lot of gurus operate. They offer lots of "teaching" that is really nothing more than filling heads with mindless actions. Teaching people to think/learn for themselves is the true skill to teach.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Plenum - 01-23-2016
(01-23-2016, 12:39 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: "Learning for others" IE teaching them to not learn for themselves is possible, I believe. And it's infringement. At that point you basically have a puppet you are feeding. This is how a lot of gurus operate. They offer lots of "teaching" that is really nothing more than filling heads with mindless actions. Teaching people to think/learn for themselves is the true skill to teach.
Thanks Jade. That's a really cogent answer.
Basically, it's a kind of enslavement.
Quote:50.6 Questioner: Could you give an example of negative polarization sharing love of self? It would seem to me that that would deplete negative polarization. Could you expand on that concept?
Ra: I am Ra. We may not use examples of known beings due to the infringement this would cause. Thus we must be general.
The negatively oriented being will be one who feels that it has found power that gives meaning to its existence precisely as the positive polarization does feel. This negative entity will strive to offer these understandings to other-selves, most usually by the process of forming the elite, the disciples, and teaching the need and rightness of the enslavement of other-selves for their own good. These other-selves are conceived to be dependent upon the self and in need of the guidance and the wisdom of the self.
it's the kind of 'teaching' that does not liberate, and allow other's to think for themselves, and come to their own conclusions.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Parsons - 01-23-2016
Jade, I agree with you except for one semantical difference: I would say that the person in your scenario that is on the receiving end isn't actually learning at all. Therefore I would say you cannot truly learn/teach for another.
Pleno, I'm not sure if you had this in mind when creating this thread:
17.2 Wrote:Questioner: Is it possible to help an entity to reach fourth-density level in these last days?
Ra: I am Ra. It is impossible to help another being directly. It is only possible to make catalyst available in whatever form, the most important being the radiation of realization of oneness with the Creator from the self, less important being information such as we share with you.
We, ourselves, do not feel an urgency for this information to be widely disseminated. It is enough that we have made it available to three, four, or five. This is extremely ample reward, for if one of these obtains fourth-density understanding due to this catalyst then we shall have fulfilled the Law of One in the distortion of service.
We encourage a dispassionate attempt to share information without concern for numbers or quick growth among others. That you attempt to make this information available is, in your term, your service. The attempt, if it reaches one, reaches all.
We cannot offer shortcuts to enlightenment. Enlightenment is of the moment, is an opening to intelligent infinity. It can only be accomplished by the self, for the self. Another self cannot teach/learn enlightenment, but only teach/learn information, inspiration, or a sharing of love, of mystery, of the unknown that makes the other-self reach out and begin the seeking process that ends in a moment, but who can know when an entity will open the gate to the present?
I would say this is applicable to general learning rather than just advancement to 4D.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Plenum - 01-23-2016
Yeah Parsons, it's some 'area' I'm trying to explore right now: sort of themed around yellow-ray, and the interactions with other selves. There's a few other threads of mine which coalesce around this 'theme'; of organisation (group-effort), the nature of 'consent', and how/what learning is, and what we actually 'do' when we interact, try to gauge a situation, and then assess what our contribution to that interaction is.
On one level, it might be overthinking things, and not going with the spontaneous flow. But on another level - especially in trying to further examine the nature of yellow ray in third density - it's something which we can definitely use to polarize positive; in the same way that the 'other side' uses yellow ray to polarise negative.
If we could bring in another Ra quote, which is lengthy, but probably speaks to many of the issues I'm still getting a handle on, I think it's appropriate and apt.
Quote:18.6 Questioner: Basically I would say that to infringe on the free will of another self or another entity would be the basic thing never to do under the Law of One. Can you state any other breaking of the Law of One than this basic rule?
Ra: I am Ra. As one proceeds from the primal distortion of free will, one proceeds to the understanding of the focal points of intelligent energy which have created the intelligences or the ways of a particular mind/body/spirit complex in its environment, both what you would call natural and what you would call man-made. Thus, the distortions to be avoided are those which do not take into consideration the distortions of the focus of energy of love/light, or shall we say, the Logos of this particular sphere or density. These include the lack of understanding of the needs of the natural environment, the needs of other-selves’ mind/body/spirit complexes. These are many due to the various distortions of man-made complexes in which the intelligence and awareness of entities themselves have chosen a way of using the energies available.
Thus, what would be an improper distortion with one entity is proper with another. We can suggest an attempt to become aware of the other-self as self and thus do that action which is needed by other-self, understanding from the other-self’s intelligence and awareness. In many cases this does not involve the breaking of the distortion of free will into a distortion or fragmentation called infringement. However, it is a delicate matter to be of service, and compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.
The area or arena called the societal complex is an arena in which there are no particular needs for care for it is the prerogative/honor/duty of those in the particular planetary sphere to act according to its free will for the attempted aid of the social complex.
Thus, you have two simple directives: awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in nature, awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in self to be shared, when it seems appropriate, by the entity with the social complex, and you have one infinitely subtle and various set of distortions of which you may be aware; that is, distortions with respect to self and other-selves not concerning free will but concerning harmonious relationships and service to others as other-selves would most benefit.
/ /
but I think your quote is quite apt; and probably speaks to the heart of the issue, more directly.
We may not be able to teach/learn enlightenment; but we can certainly share information and inspiration, when it's relevant, and when there is a calling for it from the other-self - whether that be an explicit expression for interaction, or one that is discerned by the one choosing to offer an opportunity for an interaction.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Jade - 01-23-2016
With that, I think the relationship is two-way. Firstly, the teacher has the responsibility to recognize when the student is not actually learning but just absorbing and regurgitating. And as learners, we have the responsibility to give second thought whenever another's words or thoughts enter our heads - which is discernment.
RE: Learning for Another Self - Turtle - 01-24-2016
(01-20-2016, 09:36 AM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: what do you think is behind this concept?
is it even possible to actually learn for another self?
is there an inbuilt assumption or arrogance behind such an attempt?
is it about giving someone the answers (the answers you arrived at) before they asked the question for themself?
thanks for you thoughts
It is not possible to learn for another-self.
RE: Learning for Another Self - spero - 01-24-2016
probs another apt quote for the discussion
Quote:15.13 Questioner: [You] previously gave us some information about what we should do in balancing. Is there any information that we can publish now about any particular exercises or methods of balancing [these] centers?
Ra: I am Ra. The exercises given for publication seen in comparison with the material now given are in total a good beginning. It is important to allow each seeker to enlighten itself rather than for any messenger to attempt in language to teach/learn for the entity, thus being teach/learner and learn/teacher. This is not in balance with your third density. We learn from you. We teach to you. Thus, we teach/learn. If we learned for you, this would cause imbalance in the direction of the distortion of free will. There are other items of information allowable. However, you have not yet reached these items in your lines of questioning and it is our belief/feeling complex that the questioner shall shape this material in such a way that your mind/body/spirit complexes shall have entry to it, thus we answer your queries as they arise in your mind complex.
(01-23-2016, 04:27 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote: With that, I think the relationship is two-way. Firstly, the teacher has the responsibility to recognize when the student is not actually learning but just absorbing and regurgitating. And as learners, we have the responsibility to give second thought whenever another's words or thoughts enter our heads - which is discernment.
great point jade, and probably why q'uo prefaces nearly every session with a reminder for people to use their own discernment and accept only what feels right for them. that said, at least the questioners have mulled over the topics they ask about, but when a transcript can reach everyone instantaneously via the web its more for those randomly reading a session i reckon.