Following the 4th Density Harvest, what will we perceive?

[unity100]

Quote:That does not mean we have the right to judge those cultures, though!

of course it does. you just judged them. you called their practices as
barbaric and outdated, and rejected even discussing them.

you have used your judgment, in order to discern a negative behavior set
that is incompatible with your chosen path. that is how it is supposed
to be. there are endless iterations of judge, judgment, using judgment
in the material we are discussing.

Unity, you can nitpick if you want, but it is making it more difficult for me to respond without putting a tremendous amount of energy into arguments that have veered from their original intentions.

Yes, I "characterized" their practices as barbaric, because you called it that. I stated they are outdated, because the Aztecs have been declared extinct since August 1521. And please do not twist my points. I did not reject discussing them. I stated that the practices of these cultures are not aligned with the purpose of this forum. I did not personally judge these cultures to be worthy or not of discussion.[/quote]

it doesnt differ if you reword it or phrase it beautifully. the act of judging stays as judging. you judged, through various reasons, that the negative polarization techniques which were used by aztecs, were not aligned with the purpose of this forum. despite nazis used the same techniques to polarize. that is judgment.

you may dub it as 'characterizing' or you may dub it with different wordage, but the act stays same.

HH was brought up as an example by Godwide_void to question why information "like" HH can't be seen for what it is--catalyst to help someone move along their spiritual path. But that particular example (as hotly contested as it has become here at Bring4th) was suddenly opened up by a number of us and evaluated once again. Your point that HH is not a truth against the LOO material is true. But this was never the argument. No one was trying to validate HH against the LOO, which is why there is no further reason to continue this part of the conversation.

youre mistaken. there was at least one person doing that validation. not against LOO, but through LOO. to the point of claiming malice to not be malice, and exonerating the 3d negative harvestees of various negative properties like sexual excesses, and malice.

There is no "past" in the Aztecs barbaric ways? Or the rule of Nazism, which from "today's" measure died when the four international powers occupied and split up Germany into four pieces? How is that not considered the past by humanity? Sure, fringe aspects of society may carry on the ideologies of these cultures, but we are hardly living in those times now by any pop culture perspective.

no, there is no 'past' in them. ritual human sacrifice was not only used by aztecs. if you remember, it was also used by nazis. and a noticeable number of them, who may be negatively harvestable, were still among us circa 1981, and they may still be around.

the barbaric ways you dub, is apparently one of the methods of negative polarization. it recurs in activities of many, from aztecs to genghis khan, to nazis.

distasteful as it may be, it seems this kind of thing is a method of polarization in the 'greater scheme' of things in this universe.

yes, I am rejecting the barbaric actions since I am trying to polarize towards the light. Yes, this means I am aligned with your quote, but my question was not about the validity of your quote. It was asking you why you felt you had to make this justification when no one was arguing against it in the first place. If you go back and read the thread, you will not find us talking about accepting the negative attributes of humanity as part of our positively-oriented paths. We simply pointing out that it is appropriate for everyone to find their own Truths within experiences that may be seen as STO or STS, as everything is born and leads back to the Creator. Therefore, every experience is perfect, and we are not doing ourselves any favors by judging how others perceive their Truths.

im at a loss to how easily people shape their opinion and arguments without paying attention to details, which are extremely important in this kind of topics, discussions, and actually delicate learning.

someone, as i mentioned above, has just attempted to exonerate negative path from malice, excess, extreme negative acts. to the point of redefining malice to be not itself even.

this was wrong. even if someone wanted to polarize in a negative path, this will still stay wrong. the person, in its subconscious desire to negative polarizely may want to redefine these to make it more acceptable to its conscious mind to overcome the difficulties that are posed by the outlook of today's cultural conditioning towards things like these. but even in that case, these will still remain wrong, and will keep remaining wrong - malice will be still malice, and 3d negative harvestees, as exampled, will keep engaging in extreme excesses to polarize.

the straightforward, and proper negative polarization method would be to accept these as they are and polarize as such in lieu of society's perspective and dropping all societal conditionings, like nazis did. just like in the mechanic in which the orion entities directly deliver negative philosophy when the entity they contact is negative, but deliver doomsday prophecies, warnings against future or positive looking negative philosophy when they come up against a positive individual. same mechanic.

in this case it doesnt even seem like the individual is actually wanting to polarize negatively however. so, hence the 'being led astray angle.

Unity, no one was ever asking YOU to accept anything as valid. Some of us were in agreement that in general, we cannot know 100% whether something is 100% Truth, or 100% lie. So logically, what I believe is 100% truth, may in fact be 100% lie. Why? Because we choose to believe in something, and therefore it becomes our personal Truth.

please next time make certain statements after being sure of what has transpired in a thread next time. there has been one individual who wanted what nonsense hh produced to be accepted as valid.

You make me nervous when you say "something resonating with someone else does not make it truth." Of COURSE it makes it a personal truth! Maybe not for YOU, maybe not for ME, but most definitely for that person who chooses to believe! It is our God-given right to exercise our will and to believe in whatever we want. For all intents and purposes, people live and die by those beliefs--their Truths. Who is to judge what is right and wrong for each person?

there is no point to either this forum, or Ra material, or discussing any of these if we dont have common truths on which this universe revolves on. everyone can just imagine their imaginary universe, and these can just be their 'truth'.

the real truth is, things do not work that way. someone believing that the negative 3d harvestees are not malignant entities that engage in excesses, but instead extremely balanced entities which are beyond acts that are malignant, harmful, excessive, or imbalanced, will NOT make that a truth.

the entity may keep believing it is so. encounter with such a negative entity and its excesses may prove otherwise. the entity may still keep believing that it is so, however.

..............

we are to judge what is right and wrong for us ourselves, and us as a collective. this is the reason why there is more than one person existing in 3rd density, and why there are societies, why there are collective thoughts and judgments that facilitate our progression. just like how the current society judges the acts of aztecs or nazis to be barbarous as of this point. its a judgment.

as undesirable as it may be to some people who prefer to believe that things be just like how they want them to be, it is not how universe works. otherwise, the below would be true :

you could polarize positively by enslaving, slaughtering, dominating others.

you cannot. it is not how the universe works. no amount of belief, thinking, personalization or abstraction will change that. for apparently this was how the universe was created to function by infinite intelligence, so all the stuff associated with it, positive and negative can be actually made possible.

if we are polarizing positively, that is wrong for us. it is a common truth. for those who are polarizing negatively, it is also wrong. for, they use it to polarize negatively. therefore, it is a common truth that you cannot polarize positively that way in our universe.

Good points-- all of them having nothing to do with the original question, which I felt was answered appropriately. Hidden Hand was used as an example for its STO/STS properties, and has a presence on this forum because of its spiritually contextualized information. We don't talk about scalping heads and killing the Jewish community on this forum for the same reasons we are not discussing automobile mechanical issues--it's not relevant.

i elaborated above.

Unity, I really don't want to belabor these points any further. Unless you feel I am articulating gross misconceptions, I'm not sure how much more utility there will be in splitting hairs further. I find I am defending myself more than enjoying an exchange of ideas, and that is where I personally bow out when writing on forums.

Thanks, brother.
Steve

in delicate heated controversial topics, there will be heat. its inevitable.

saying 'that is not correct' to someone who thinks that it is possible to polarize positively by employing what is used in negative polarization, or someone who is arguing that malice is not malice, or arguing that sto is not sto, is inevitably going to bring the associated heat.

other people joining in the discussion by missing important details as to what transpired in between others, and approaching in different angles, like what just happened here, may complicate the situation in addition.

...........


yes, i used judgment. i used judgment, and told that proposition brought by JustLikeYou, saying that the negative 3d harvestees would refrain from doing malicious acts, or engage in excesses, was wrong. after that, i had told that redefining malice to not be malice was also wrong. and, since it seems these misconceptions were manufactured by hidden hand, the discussion took a turn in that direction.