(12-10-2018, 02:23 AM)flow Wrote: here's an example of how karma works according to buddhist point if view.

it is a story about Sariputra, who saw a layman sitting in front of his house, eating a fish from the pond behind the house, holding his son in his lap. the dog was eating the fishbones and the man kicks the dog. with his clairvoyance Sariputra saw the law of karma in action so he comments:

“He eats his father’s flesh and kicks his mother away,
The enemy he killed he dandles on his lap,
The wife is gnawing at her husband’s bones,
Samsara can be such a farce.“

this is an example of how we stray away by karma.
our attachments, aversions, ignorance, biases and predispositions, positive or negative deeds all take part in molding our karma and, eventually, determine our next reborn, which can be anywhere in samsara. if we made lots of evil deeds then we gonna be reborn in hell realms, if we make lots of good ones then we will go in gods realm. the idea in buddhism is: 1. to realize true nature of things so you exhaust karma and no longer reborn meaninglessly and endlessly in samsara and 2. to use this realization in helping others out of samsara. in Tibetan buddhism they make boddhisattva vow - that is that you'll stay in samsara as long as it takes to liberate all sentient beings. to me this is obviously service-to-others path.

in regard that buddhism doesn't really recognize the soul that’s not the case from what i understand. what they say is our true self is not our ego. ego dies. our true self does not and it is our true self what reincarnates. the problem is that we doesn’t recognize our true self mistakenly thinking that it is our ego, our personality. Hatonn put it very clearly as well: “personality is an illusory self”. Tibetan master of meditation can say: “because i no longer am, i am everybody, i am everything”.

(12-09-2018, 02:35 PM)flow Wrote: i don't understand how an entity which have done lots of negative action does balance/redeem their negative karma from Confederation point of view?

Quote:10.1 ▶ Questioner: I think it would clarify things for us to go back to the time just before the transfer of souls from Maldek; see how the Law of One operated with respect to this transfer and why this was necessary. What happened to Maldek— or the people on Maldek to cause them to lose their planet? How long ago did this occur?

Ra: I am Ra. The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self. This was, however, for the most part, couched in a sincere belief/thought structure which seemed to the perception of the mind/body complexes of this sphere to be positive and of service to others. The devastation that wracked their biosphere and caused its disintegration resulted from what you call war.

The escalation went to the furthest extent of the technology this social complex had at its disposal in the space/time present of the then time. This time was approximately seven oh five, oh oh oh, seven hundred and five thousand [705,000] of your years ago. The cycles had begun much, much earlier upon this sphere due to its relative ability to support the first-dimensional life forms at an earlier point in the space/time continuum of your solar system. These entities were so traumatized by this occurrence that they were in what you may call a social complex knot or tangle of fear. Some of your time passed. No one could reach them. No beings could aid them.

Approximately six hundred thousand [600,000] of your years ago the then-existing members of the Confederation were able to deploy a social memory complex and untie the knot of fear. The entities were then able to recall that they were conscious. This awareness brought them to the point upon what you would call the lower astral planes where they could be nurtured until each mind/body/spirit complex was able finally to be healed of this trauma to the extent that each entity was able to examine the distortions it had experienced in the previous life/illusion complex.

After this experience of learn/teaching, the group decision was to place upon itself a type of what you may call karma alleviation. For this purpose they came into incarnation within your planetary sphere in what were not acceptable human forms. This then they have been experiencing until the distortions of destruction are replaced by distortions towards the desire for a less distorted vision of service to others. Since this was the conscious decision of the great majority of those beings in the Maldek experience, the transition to this planet began approximately five hundred thousand [500,000] of your years ago and the type of body complex available at that time was used..

(12-10-2018, 03:47 PM)flow Wrote: i hope some one with extensive knowledge of Confederation material will chime in with some relevant quotes which could fill up some gaps.

thank you for support, flofrog

(12-10-2018, 09:50 PM)MangusKhan Wrote: I'm reading the Dhammapada now, and I still don't understand Siddhartha's polarity. Is he positive, or is he negative? His philosophy is such that it defies all labels. Passionless and pure, acquiring energy-density for the sake of energy-density. He seems like he's enslaving others, but then he is also completely harmless and benevolent.

(12-10-2018, 11:04 PM)Stranger Wrote:

(12-10-2018, 09:50 PM)MangusKhan Wrote: I'm reading the Dhammapada now, and I still don't understand Siddhartha's polarity. Is he positive, or is he negative? His philosophy is such that it defies all labels. Passionless and pure, acquiring energy-density for the sake of energy-density. He seems like he's enslaving others, but then he is also completely harmless and benevolent.

That is shocking to me.  Who is he enslaving?

(12-11-2018, 01:47 AM)MangusKhan Wrote:

(12-10-2018, 11:04 PM)Stranger Wrote:

(12-10-2018, 09:50 PM)MangusKhan Wrote: I'm reading the Dhammapada now, and I still don't understand Siddhartha's polarity. Is he positive, or is he negative? His philosophy is such that it defies all labels. Passionless and pure, acquiring energy-density for the sake of energy-density. He seems like he's enslaving others, but then he is also completely harmless and benevolent.

That is shocking to me.  Who is he enslaving?

Maybe "enslaving" isn't the word I'm exactly looking for. He often seems to impinge on the free-will of others, bending their will away from the world and towards his own. But his will was pure, that the painful illusions of this world cease and all beings partake instead in the peace of truth. All the joys and pleasures and passions of life are completely rejected and invalidated by Siddhartha's philosophy, because they all constitute a partaking of illusion and the suffering that accompanies it. He seems to have no problem breaking the veil for another in order to convince them of the foolishness of participating in the world and fulfilling their desires.

I believe it was Q'uo who once said that Gautama ignored the heart, but I can't find that session now. So this is where my confusion about the polarity of his philosophy and actions stems from. I will say that I don't really believe at all that the Buddha was negative. Compassion and loving-kindness towards others still takes a prominent role in the philosophy. It's just the lack of love for the world and the processes of the world which makes him seem so uncaring. So much of his philosophy is about discipline and control, but of the self as opposed to others.

(12-11-2018, 02:31 AM)xise Wrote:

(12-11-2018, 01:47 AM)MangusKhan Wrote:

(12-10-2018, 11:04 PM)Stranger Wrote:

(12-10-2018, 09:50 PM)MangusKhan Wrote: I'm reading the Dhammapada now, and I still don't understand Siddhartha's polarity. Is he positive, or is he negative? His philosophy is such that it defies all labels. Passionless and pure, acquiring energy-density for the sake of energy-density. He seems like he's enslaving others, but then he is also completely harmless and benevolent.

That is shocking to me.  Who is he enslaving?

Maybe "enslaving" isn't the word I'm exactly looking for. He often seems to impinge on the free-will of others, bending their will away from the world and towards his own. But his will was pure, that the painful illusions of this world cease and all beings partake instead in the peace of truth. All the joys and pleasures and passions of life are completely rejected and invalidated by Siddhartha's philosophy, because they all constitute a partaking of illusion and the suffering that accompanies it. He seems to have no problem breaking the veil for another in order to convince them of the foolishness of participating in the world and fulfilling their desires.

I believe it was Q'uo who once said that Gautama ignored the heart, but I can't find that session now. So this is where my confusion about the polarity of his philosophy and actions stems from. I will say that I don't really believe at all that the Buddha was negative. Compassion and loving-kindness towards others still takes a prominent role in the philosophy. It's just the lack of love for the world and the processes of the world which makes him seem so uncaring. So much of his philosophy is about discipline and control, but of the self as opposed to others.

I have pondered some related issues to the OP, and to your post MangusKhan, from a general perspective of communicability of spiritual concepts and I believe something that may be missed in these discussions is what I call the professor effect. I've said before that spiritual concepts are difficult to fully convey before, and I think there is some recognition from both Ra's words and other people that it can be difficult to fully capture a spiritual concept in english, though I believe it's still useful to try. This concept I believe has been somewhat decently discussed. 

However, I believe the 'professor-effect' for lack of a better phrase coming to mind, also applies a substantial additional layer of miscommunication to the communication of any complex concept, including spiritual concepts. I first started pondering this when I was reading an Autobiography of a Yogi, and the author's guru informed the author early in the story and early in the author's life that he had a gift with conveying spiritual concepts in words and that he would be the one to convey the spiritual message of Yoga to the west (this response came about when the author initial said to his guru that the guru had a deeper internal embracement of the spiritual concepts). 

-----

In short, inner knowledge and the ability to teach inner knowledge and to put into effective words inner knowledge are different (though related) skillsets. It seems very common that intelligent or genius professors have found some amazing concepts in their head, but they have true difficulty explaining them in a concise or effective manner. I personally have experienced this in universities and often the smartest professor has a reputation for being a horrible teacher or presenter. 

I believe this professor-effect has a significant role in the teachings of many masters. Whether it affected Buddha's ability to convey his enlightenment, I can only wonder. But I think it is a concept that is important to bear in mind whenever we discuss the words of a spiritual being that has passed away because now we have 3 layers:
(1) the inherent difficulty of conveying spiritual concepts in words
(2) the 'professor-effect' -the difficulty that a teacher may have to convey a concept they understand fully to a student because they are not natural teachers by language or are not good with words
(3) the additional error added into the words when they have been conveyed over centuries to our present day

A part of me feels as if I have added an additional layer of confusion to the discussion, but I hope instead I just shown light on the confusion that was already inherently present in these sorts of discussions. As Plenum often says, I feel it strangely appropriate to end this sentence with a Namaste 

(12-11-2018, 01:28 AM)flow Wrote: confederation did mention somewhere that Jesus mostly dissiminates Love, while Buddha mostly Wisdom.

another approach Q'uo have shared that buddhism is passive/reductive path, while christianity is active/inclusive

buddhism in general is rather tricky, as theravada buddhism don't mention helping others get enlightened, so they  work on themselves. it is mahayana and vajrayana approach to begin this path with ultimate goal to liberate all sentient beings. then again tibetan buddhism use  such a vast array of different meditation techniqs, visualisation, deities etc., that "classic" theravadins don't consider it to be a buddhism.

(12-11-2018, 06:50 PM)loostudent Wrote: .

Morover the illusion/Creation is more appreciated in Ra Material than in buddhism. On itself it's not a prison you have to escape from.

(12-09-2018, 02:35 PM)flow Wrote: i don’t understand what happens if we make bad, evil deeds form Confederation point of view? how do we redeem/balance negative karma? for example, what happens to those who make others suffer, like murderers or those who take pleasure in causing suffering to others?

from buddhism point of view they reborn in hell or hungry ghosts realms where they reap the fruits of their negative actions, that is - they suffer themselves until their negative karma is exhausted.

i don't understand how an entity which have done lots of negative action does balance/redeem their negative karma from Confederation point of view?

how polarization come into play? i mean what happens with murderers and other beings who is not s-t-s or who just enjoy make people suffer, be it physical or mental abuse, sexual maniacs, torturers etc., in case they are not polarized enough to be 4th density negative harvestale?

for example, it is said about Hitler that “the mind/body/spirit complex known as Adolf is at this time in an healing process in the middle astral planes of your spherical force field. this entity was greatly confused and, although aware of the circumstance of change in vibratory level associated with the cessation of the chemical body complex, nevertheless, needed a great deal of care." does that mean that entities with a lot of negative karma go to inner planes where they undergo “healing” process until they redeem their negative karma? what does “healing process in the middle astral planes of your spherical force field” refers to? is it parallel to buddhism’s hell realm?