objective of catalyst re unswayed

[IndigoSalvia]

Little confused on the subtleties that Ra is teach/learning re the objective of catalyst: to be unswayed, and eventually, no longer need catalyst. 

I am unable to copy/paste here for some reason (believe it's pasting but infinitesimally). 

My questions involve 42.2 thru 42.9. 

I understand Ra's comments to the extent that, when encountering catalyst, being unswayed does not mean being indifferent or objective. Later, Ra adds love (being imbued with love) is the response [of a perfectly-balanced entity]. Then Ra adds that a being may or may not observe an opportunity to be of service. However, Ra also says (paraphrased): if a response is seen in the being, even if it is simply observed, the entity is still using the catalyst for learn/teaching. The end result is that the catalyst is no longer needed. (paraphrased)

I can understand not getting caught up in the hoopla of catalytic experience, but instead, feeling the love of one-ness with each and all. Where I get tripped up is that I understand Ra to be saying "unswayed" and "no response," and also saying "love" and "opportunity for service" which contradict the former.  

What, in your understanding, is Ra teach/learning in these statements? 

Thank you kindly for your insights.

[Sacred Fool]

My reading of this is that they are describing a very high state of being where one is steadily receiving and offering so much love, that one's being is so solidly oriented to and saturated with love and service, that the catalyst of the illusion is not taken personally at all and one is not tripped up by it because one is in such strong alignment with self as love.

I read it that "unswayed" means "not destabilised."  It does not mean unfeeling or unresponsive, but simply loving--same before, same during, same after.  One feels compassion and offers service from a place of personal balance and poise which realises that one's only purpose here is to love and to serve.

For example:

42.4 Questioner: Would a perfectly balanced entity feel an emotional response when being attacked by the other-self?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. The response is love.

[fiatlux0]

Where I get tripped up is that I understand Ra to be saying "unswayed" and "no response," and also saying "love" and "opportunity for service" which contradict the former. 

I think "no response" does not automatically mean an absence of love or service. An analogy would be parents watching a toddler learn to walk on a soft mat, the toddler falls and stands up numerous times, while the watchful parents do nothing. Would one say the parents are not loving or not helpful to their child

[Dtris]

When you play a game or watch a movie for the first time, you may have a strong reaction. When you watch the movie for the thousandth time, you may have no reaction. Why? Simply because you have seen it all before. When a person can reach a place where all catalysts of the third density have been utilized, nothing is sufficiently new to create a novel reaction. Thus you are unswayed.

[Nikki]

There are times that I do not feel emotions, I do not react but observe. Those times that I do not feel what is called emotions, love rules. I have examined the inner self and have realized that emotions (which is a reaction) are usually triggered by the physical brain. Feelings are in the body and usually sparked by love or emotions. But the love that is spoken about as the original Thought of the Creator is all encompassing and does not need the mind or body, it is consciousness.

Wonder if anyone knows of any equations from these teachings about protecting self and those we love. Like Goliath and David. You can still love the truth of the Creator in all life, but with the power of the Creator also be able to effect the illusion. I have beliefs but do not feel secure in them yet and know these teachings will not lead me astray.