Comparing Ra and the Cassiopaeans

[zedro]

In the Cassiopaean version, STO and STS exist as universal abstractions, as cosmic "thought centers", considered very real, and which beings are aligned with in differing proportions. STO pulls towards full consciousness and non-materiality, while STS pulls towards consciousness ultimately collapsing and "falling asleep" as matter. LKJ moralizes it in terms of "ignorance is bliss" being the core of materialism and in some way all STS mentality. The idea of STS-ness at the core of what turns consciousness into sleeping matter is very gnostic.

By contrast, Ra's version describes the cosmos as something much more organically evolving, in which good and evil are not handed down from the top-down. Instead, STO and STS emerged from the bottom-up as a result of logoses experimenting with tweaking the parameters of sub-creations. The fundamental division -- or creation of the illusion of non-unity -- is not the same division as the STS-STO division, unlike in LKJ's cosmology.

I feel like this is a matter of relative (contextual) perspective, where the two views aren't necessarily exclusive of each other. The former view feels like it lends itself to a more practical perspective, the latter more philosophical. But like anything, both may have their pitfalls if misapplied.

I have no problem with the labels good/evil, because I can apply it in a contextual manner (there is a basic 3d morality, not necessarily a popular viewpoint here but I'm not going to debate it ). But I can also understand the 'usefulness' of said polarities from a higher viewpoint at the same time. So while I don't want to get overly invested in morality plays, I also don't want to become so detached that I become a 'benign sociopath', because that wouldn't be useful to my function.