+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" (/showthread.php?tid=19568)
Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - CloudsReflected - 11-16-2021
In one of the sessions, Ra described marriages as "adversary relationships". He talks about our cultural propensity to choose these types of arrangements instead of freely and openly loving all beings.
Can someone explain what he meant in a bit more detail? Is this an endorsement of polyamory, free love and multiple sexual partners and a condemnation of monogamy and marriage?
From Ra's perspective, is marriage not a natural state for human beings? Does it lead to resentment and is it no longer necessary for child-rearing?
I believe that I am a wanderer, and have struggled with many things in this reality. I am currently married and it feels very difficult to me. Monogamy is very important to my spouse but not to me. I want to connect with people and express what I feel inside for other people, including intimately and sexually. I love my spouse but feel very restricted and not able to express myself, and that I am flawed for feeling this way.
Other wanderers, what are your thoughts on marriage and monogamy? Can you relate? Is this what Ra means by adversarial relationships?
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - IndigoSalvia - 11-16-2021
Ra discusses these issues when talking about sexual energy transfers, and especially when comparing pre-veil (3D counterparts prior to the veil) and post-veil times. Check out session 84 to start. As is the nature of Q&A, these topics come up in a number of sessions.
My take-way was that there is spiritual opportunity in intimately and deeply bonding with other-selves as mates. Such deep bonding doesn't require a marriage and all of the implications involved in the institution of marriage, such as legal, financial, etc.
Because preserving free will is of paramount importance to Ra, I don't recall Ra recommending any particular approach. Ra explores the topics from a metaphysical perspective, the Logos' evolving designs and outcomes of 'experiments,' and leaves the choosing to us.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Dtris - 11-16-2021
Remember that Ra has the perspective of not only looking at the world as a whole, but also time. Thru history and most locations marriage has not been about love. Also due to the legal ramifications of marriage it sets up partners to have interests which are not aligned, and this can cause adversity.
Ra however is pretty clear that the mated state of two people being committed to each other is by the logos design as one of the methods of teaching STO polarization.
Ra never endorses or condemns anything. All is experience to be used to polarize and from where Ra is sitting we are like children playing. Even if we do something silly like blow up a planet, in the long run it is not a big deal and we will grow up just fine.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - IndigoSalvia - 11-16-2021
https://www.llresearch.org/channeling/2018/1215
You might find this discussion interesting.
The question is:
"Yes, among the energies at play at present, there is one prominent thread catalyzing many people that I’ve crossed paths with, and it seems to do with intimacy, love, transparency, openness, vulnerability, and the question about the boundaries of relationships. One general term that in part speaks to this is polyamory, though I suspect that what I’m noticing has larger metaphysical origin and implication. Can Q’uo speak to this?"
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - tadeus - 11-16-2021
Maybe Ra didn't want to mention that a marriage can be seen primary as a legal act by law.
Quote:marriage, a legally and socially sanctioned union, usually between a man and a woman, that is regulated by laws, rules, customs, beliefs, and attitudes that prescribe the rights and duties of the partners and accords status to their offspring (if any).
It makes no difference when the laws and rules come from a church law or state law.
For a relationship between two individuals there is only the yellow (and green) ray chakra needed.
From this point of view a marriage is really a "adversary relationship".
A marriage has not direct to do with love and partnership.
I know this truth is not really romantic.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - flofrog - 11-16-2021
I think there is a place where Ra speaks of the many more opportunities for catalyst offered by mariage than living solitary in a cave
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Fool - 11-16-2021
I really liked Carla’s take on marriage in Living the Law of One 101: The Choice. She had a great summary of Marriage in the chapter on the Yellow ray energy center.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Diana - 11-17-2021
(11-16-2021, 06:26 PM)flofrog Wrote: I think there is a place where Ra speaks of the many more opportunities for catalyst offered by mariage than living solitary in a cave
I think this is definitely part of the idea of marriage, or any living situation with another person, as adversarial.
When two people live together, being two different individuals no matter how like-minded they are, there will be areas of conflict or areas where compromise is needed. A common issue which comes to mind is maintaining the environment—house cleaning. Unless there is a live-in maid, someone has to do it. Generally the idea is that both partners share equally in that responsibility and even more, do it gladly out of respect and love for the environment. But we all know it doesn't usually play out like that.
Unless two people are both independent financially, emotionally, and mentally, and stay together not because of a legal contract but because they wish to, there will likely be imbalances. And that includes whatever societal notions affect the partnership which override what the prompts of the spirit—such as monogamy. Woody Allen comes to mind. I remember how ostracized and reviled he was for leaving Mia Farrow for one of their stepchildren. But Allen is still married to her, and she is a very average-seeming person, and I imagine that they are soulmates or (soul)contracted to be together or something like that. But societal ideas of what marriage and love are judged that union without looking beyond the obvious (in other words, what society thought should or shouldn't be).
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - tadeus - 11-17-2021
(11-17-2021, 12:00 PM)Diana Wrote: I think this is definitely part of the idea of marriage, or any living situation with another person, as adversarial.
This is what everyone should think - but what is the reality?
If two beings want to swear allegiance to each other in some form, why does it need a document from a public institution?
Why this needs any kind of registration?
A marriage certificate primarily records the joining of two merchant ships to form a joint merchant fleet under a common flag.
This creates a new legal entity called 'spouses'.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Patrick - 11-17-2021
The celebrant woman who presided over my wife and I's mariage told us that there was something magical about a married relationship in comparison to the same relationship but not getting married. We thought it was just a romantic notion on her part because it's her job after all.
My wife and I were together for 15 years before getting married and we mostly did it for the party.
But for the past two years we really noticed a very subtle change. It actually brought us even closer together.It might be that the public display of intent and accompanying blessings from many people do have an effect after all.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - CloudsReflected - 11-17-2021
Awesome, thank you all, great insight.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Patrick - 11-17-2021
(11-17-2021, 02:45 PM)CloudsReflected Wrote: Awesome, thank you all, great insight.
By the way I am not requiring exclusivity from my wife. But she requires it from me. I respect her wish fully, but I do understand what you mean. I am able to be in love with other people at the same time, although I do not act on this. What helps me to find it very easy to keep myself only for my wife is that I am aware of what we are learning from each others by being exclusive to one another. Or what Ra calls entering into a program of service.
https://www.lawofone.info/s/83#3 Ra Wrote:83.3 Questioner: Thank you. I’m going to ask a rather long, complex question here, and I would request that the answer to each portion of this question be given if there was a significant difference prior to the veil than following the veil so that I can get an idea of how what we experience now is used for better polarization.
Asking if there is any significant difference, and what was the difference, before the veil in the following while incarnate in third density: sleep, dreams, physical pain, mental pain, sex, disease, catalyst programming, random catalyst, relationships, or communication with the higher self or with the mind/body/spirit totality or any other mind, body, or spirit functions before the veil that would be significant with respect to their difference after the veil?
Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, let us establish that both before and after the veil the same conditions existed in time/space; that is, the veiling process is a space/time phenomenon.
Secondly, the character of experience was altered drastically by the veiling process. In some cases such as the dreaming and the contact with the higher self, the experience was quantitatively different due to the fact that the veiling is a primary cause of the value of dreams and is also the single door against which the higher self must stand awaiting entry. Before veiling, dreams were not for the purpose of using the so-called unconscious to further utilize catalyst but were used to learn/teach from teach/learners within the inner planes as well as those of outer origin of higher density. As you deal with each subject of which you spoke you may observe, during the veiling process, not a quantitative change in the experience but a qualitative one.
Let us, as an example, choose your sexual activities of energy transfer. If you have a desire to treat other subjects in detail please query forthwith. In the instance of the sexual activity of those not dwelling within the veiling each activity was a transfer. There were some transfers of strength. Most were rather attenuated in the strength of the transfer due to the lack of veiling.
In the third density entities are attempting to learn the ways of love. If it can be seen that all are one being it becomes much more difficult for the undisciplined personality to choose one mate and, thereby, initiate itself into a program of service. It is much more likely that the sexual energy will be dissipated more randomly without either great joy or great sorrow depending from these experiences.
Therefore, the green-ray energy transfer, being almost without exception the case in sexual energy transfer prior to veiling, remains weakened and without significant crystallization. The sexual energy transfers and blockages after veiling have been discussed previously. It may be seen to be a more complex study but one far more efficient in crystallizing those who seek the green-ray energy center.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - flofrog - 11-17-2021
I am of the same mind about the dual aspect of the concept of mariage. On one side it’s a society format, legal papers and so on.
On the other side, what Patrick is talking about, I had two readings by psychics in my life. The second one was for a close family member, but the first one was more for myself and a child of mine who was very sick.
That psychic was a musician, also having learnt Sanskrit, and only taking interested party if the person believed in reincarnation. He also asked that person to prepare questions as he didn’t want to meet that person again as he didn’t want to become a crutch. He was a very interesting one.
I had a question about mariage in general, and to that question, through him, my spiritual guides said something like this :” Once you have entered the covenant of mariage, what it means, if both souls are involved in this, is that you may imagine a cocoon that is created by these two souls. If one steps out and decides to have an extra relationship outside, the cocoon is broken, and you can never re-enter this cocoon, this is not a moral judgment, this is just a fact. “
It was really interesting.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - tadeus - 11-19-2021
(11-17-2021, 02:39 PM)Patrick Wrote: My wife and I were together for 15 years before getting married and we mostly did it for the party.
Congratulation and respect - that's really romantic!
What would have happen if the same 'party' has happen without the 'celebrant woman' and the legal act?
Is it possible that the same magic would have happen?
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Patrick - 11-19-2021
(11-19-2021, 09:24 AM)tadeus Wrote:(11-17-2021, 02:39 PM)Patrick Wrote: My wife and I were together for 15 years before getting married and we mostly did it for the party.
Congratulation and respect - that's really romantic!
What would have happen if the same 'party' has happen without the 'celebrant woman' and the legal act?
Is it possible that the same magic would have happen?
Yes, at first, we were going to have a party just to celebrate Love. Somewhere along organizing the whole thing, we became attracted to the idea of actually getting married.
But even married, we are two very autonomous and individual persons. For example, we do not share the same bank account and everything common is paid 50/50. All the rest that is personal is paid by the person for themselves.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - tadeus - 11-19-2021
(11-19-2021, 09:55 AM)Patrick Wrote: Yes, at first, we were going to have a party just to celebrate Love. Somewhere along organizing the whole thing, we became attracted to the idea of actually getting married.
But even married, we are two very autonomous and individual persons. For example, we do not share the same bank account and everything common is paid 50/50. All the rest that is personal is paid by the person for themselves.
Somehow a little bit curious but interesting.
It sounds like that the marriage is just referring to the 'social expression' to swear allegiance.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Patrick - 11-19-2021
(11-19-2021, 10:14 AM)tadeus Wrote:(11-19-2021, 09:55 AM)Patrick Wrote: Yes, at first, we were going to have a party just to celebrate Love. Somewhere along organizing the whole thing, we became attracted to the idea of actually getting married.
But even married, we are two very autonomous and individual persons. For example, we do not share the same bank account and everything common is paid 50/50. All the rest that is personal is paid by the person for themselves.
Somehow a little bit curious but interesting.
It sounds like that the marriage is just referring to the 'social expression' to swear allegiance.
I would suggest to people that they should not expect marriage to change anything in their relationship. Either the commitment already exists before the wedding or at the other end of the spectrum, you should not see being married as a reason to take the other for granted. It should not change anything. You are still free after mariage and can end the relationship whenever and are staying together only because both truly wishes this and are still learning from each others. Basically, you remain married until you have exhausted the program of service you entered into. For my part, I don't think I'll see the end of that in this lifetime.
RE: Marriages as "Adversary Relationships" - Quincunx - 07-05-2022
-------