Many here know me and know that I often prefer to write in parables and analogy. In a lot of ways, this is reflective of a sense I have of the difficulty of 'pinning down' knowledge or wisdom. I strive not to learn for others but only express what I have learned as I understand it. This is because ultimately I have no control over the receptivity of others, only over that which I output.
This extends further, when you don't have any control over other peoples' behaviours, thoughts or emotions. Perhaps 'control over' is a misnomer, but I think it is a direct opposite to 'let it be'. The truth is, usually we're nowhere near either extreme of total control or acceptance, but instead we struggle between them to obtain one or the other. This struggle can tear us apart.
It becomes even more complicated when it then involves people you love, people you want to take care of and see good things for. What if they have self-harming behaviours? That can make acceptance of a person's self-destructiveness very difficult and spur the desire to try and control the behaviours.
In various philosophies the idea of control is essentially equated with evil or negativity, including the Ra material. Although in the context of the Ra material, it is specifically the acceptance or control of catalyst that is considered along these lines.
However, there are other philosophies which see a certain control as necessary to balance. Even Ra expressed this as a necessity at one point.
To take this in to a more human example, I have a lot of people in my family who work in support services or with people with disabilities. There was a case of one man who had a disorder which caused him to eat away at his own skin. Of course, he was supervised and living in a care home for this reason. If he was left completely to his own devices it's very likely he would kill himself.
Now, for many people, they would see this form of control as necessary, maybe even compassionate, because they view it as preventing a worse harm. This is the same sort of philosophy I think that Ra was expressing. Sometimes, for the greater good, there needs to be a little bit of control.
Taking that then to it's extreme, however, in a society where freedom of activity is lauded as the pinnacle of human experience, any form of control becomes the major enemy, and viewed simply as an adversary or limiter. Yet, to my view, the extremes don't really exist. There is only the ongoing struggle.
I have never seen or experienced a person with total control or total acceptance. Even in stories of saints and yogis and wizards and gods and demons and all that, the only only time you see perfection is in those unified deities which are beyond mortal experience.
However, as I have been pondering this, something has revealed itself to me. I realized that if "controlled" or "acceptance" are the two ways catalyst is 'utilized' that means that catalyst itself is not polarized, but it also means that its default state is "uncontrolled". In otherwords, acceptance is the default state and it only changes when an individuated consciousness 'catches' the flow, or grabs hold of it and tries to change its flow. That being said though, what often isn't touched is that you can actually use catalyst both ways. You can start off using catalyst negatively, and then eventually release it back in to acceptance. Like snatching a fish out of a river and then putting it back. Of course, it's not always so simple if you decide to consume the fish.
In this idea though, we have the idea of bending realities, if catalyst is the cascading flow of reality as it marches towards consciousness then when that consciousness grabs hold and changes the direction of that catalyst it is effectively a shift in reality. The new flow of the catalyst is no longer the same as it once was, so catalyst brought under brief control, shifted and then released again under acceptance.
This is because trying to 'hold on' to catalyst or control it is like trying to cup water in your hands, or redirect a river. Catalyst is continuously flowing and while you're caught up trying to hold on to what you've got there is a whole bunch more flowing behind it. Sometimes this results in a bottleneck and then people will have shift, the catalyst will move and suddenly a whole bunch of stuff will happen in their life all at once.
Sometimes this back-up is for yeeears, and when it all comes down it can be absolute hell, a true dark night of the soul. What's more, is that during this time this catalyst can't be controlled, no because this is finally the release. This is the breath you have been holding in forcing its way out. It has been so completely controlled there is nothing left to control, it must flow and trying to control it now will only make it more likely you'll drown.
This can lead people to make extreme decisions to try and escape the onslaught, it can be incredibly painful, I think this is often the time when people decide to see themselves out the door, and it is very difficult and painful for everyone around.
Sometimes though, there are people who have seen this happen, they watched you fall in to the river, and they've started running alongside it, throwing in ropes or kicking down logs for you to grab. Sometimes these things may pass you by, you won't notice because you are so concerned about drowning and just keeping your head above water. Sometimes you may even think you're better off just letting yourself drown, at least it would make the pain, the struggle, go away.
For the people running along, this is their catalyst. They don't have to help you. They could simply let you drown. Would that not be the path of acceptance? These are the kinds of moral dilemmas I feel reveal the flaws in Ra's wording when it comes to these ideas, but at the same time strike to the very heart of it.
I have found, for myself, that there is always a need for balance. Total control or total acceptance, neither are actually desirable. In the words of the Sepher Yetzirah, imbalance is equated with evil. Extremes are 'evil' or destructive.
There are times when degrees of control are needed so that acceptance can find its footing again. The interaction between the polarities doesn't need to be a battle. That is what I am starting to understanding. It doesn't have to be a war. It can be a dance, it can be jamming, it can be teamwork.
The day and the night do not war with eachother but rather dance in eternal embrace, one side of each attached to the other. So too should we treat our own light and darkness and see that we are the Earth they both revolve around.
If you are driving, you have to use the brakes to control the vehicles so it doesn't harm anyone. Control is like the brakes. Too much and it becomes dangerous, too little and it becomes dangerous. It is never perfectly safe, of course, but that is how life is.
I have gone through a lot of personal difficulties over the last year or so regarding other peoples' behaviour and the extents I have gone to 'damage control' other peoples' lives. For awhile I struggled with the idea of the balance between acceptance and control. I am a person who likes to believe in people, but sometimes the evidence is clear that a person either needs help or guidance. Sometimes people ask, but then there are the many times when you have no idea anything is wrong and it's not until things get dirty that you have a chance to react.
It is in those moments that I think our own nature is most revealed to us. You never really know how compassionate you are until you're the one in harm's way, or someone you love is at risk. Fear, anger and pain can turn people in to beasts very quickly. It can cause them to make irrational decisions, putting themselves or others in danger. This is, really, the human animal side emerging in all its strength. Fighting for its very survival, or that of the pack. Sometimes, that even makes people turn upon themselves, especially if they see themselves negatively.
It is important, I think, for us to be aware of this nature in ourselves, but at the same time, I don't think it's something that can be forced. The fact is that we are on a planet with many, many individuated consciousnesses and the truth is that there is actually nothing we have control over or the ability to accept besides the catalytic experiences of our own life.
Life is ever-flowing, and even if some entity here or there puts the brakes on, it doesn't stop. So with that in mind, don't be afraid to use the brakes when you need to. If catalyst needs to be shaped or redirected, have no fear in doing so.
If something bothers you incredibly, it is not a greater path of acceptance to ignore it, because ignoring completely it is putting the brakes on. For awhile is fine, but eventually there will be smoke and maybe fire from the burn out.
By that same note, if you are so full of joy and acceptance you are ignoring the house burning down around you, you're really just ignoring the burning house.
In either example we see extremes of acceptance and control. All or nothing.
In truth, I think that most of the time things take place somewhere closer to the center.
You don't need to choose between acceptance and control, they are two states that are meant to alternate. The fundamental binary of consciousness. Rather, it is becoming aware of the states that proves useful towards observing your own nature.
Know thyself, as the old saying goes.
This extends further, when you don't have any control over other peoples' behaviours, thoughts or emotions. Perhaps 'control over' is a misnomer, but I think it is a direct opposite to 'let it be'. The truth is, usually we're nowhere near either extreme of total control or acceptance, but instead we struggle between them to obtain one or the other. This struggle can tear us apart.
It becomes even more complicated when it then involves people you love, people you want to take care of and see good things for. What if they have self-harming behaviours? That can make acceptance of a person's self-destructiveness very difficult and spur the desire to try and control the behaviours.
In various philosophies the idea of control is essentially equated with evil or negativity, including the Ra material. Although in the context of the Ra material, it is specifically the acceptance or control of catalyst that is considered along these lines.
However, there are other philosophies which see a certain control as necessary to balance. Even Ra expressed this as a necessity at one point.
Quote:25.6 Questioner: Could you amplify the meaning of what you said by “failure to accept that which is given?”
Ra: I am Ra. At the level of time/space at which this takes place in the form of what you may call thought-war, the most accepting and loving energy would be to so love those who wished to manipulate that those entities were surrounded, engulfed, and transformed by positive energies.
This, however, being a battle of equals, the Confederation is aware that it cannot, on equal footing, allow itself to be manipulated in order to remain purely positive, for then though pure it would not be of any consequence, having been placed by the so-called powers of darkness under the heel, as you may say.
It is thus that those who deal with this thought-war must be defensive rather than accepting in order to preserve their usefulness in service to others. Thusly, they cannot accept fully what the Orion Confederation wishes to give, that being enslavement. Thusly, some polarity is lost due to this friction and both sides, if you will, must then regroup.
It has not been fruitful for either side. The only consequence which has been helpful is a balancing of the energies available to this planet so that these energies have less necessity to be balanced in this space/time, thus lessening the chances of planetary annihilation.
To take this in to a more human example, I have a lot of people in my family who work in support services or with people with disabilities. There was a case of one man who had a disorder which caused him to eat away at his own skin. Of course, he was supervised and living in a care home for this reason. If he was left completely to his own devices it's very likely he would kill himself.
Now, for many people, they would see this form of control as necessary, maybe even compassionate, because they view it as preventing a worse harm. This is the same sort of philosophy I think that Ra was expressing. Sometimes, for the greater good, there needs to be a little bit of control.
Taking that then to it's extreme, however, in a society where freedom of activity is lauded as the pinnacle of human experience, any form of control becomes the major enemy, and viewed simply as an adversary or limiter. Yet, to my view, the extremes don't really exist. There is only the ongoing struggle.
I have never seen or experienced a person with total control or total acceptance. Even in stories of saints and yogis and wizards and gods and demons and all that, the only only time you see perfection is in those unified deities which are beyond mortal experience.
However, as I have been pondering this, something has revealed itself to me. I realized that if "controlled" or "acceptance" are the two ways catalyst is 'utilized' that means that catalyst itself is not polarized, but it also means that its default state is "uncontrolled". In otherwords, acceptance is the default state and it only changes when an individuated consciousness 'catches' the flow, or grabs hold of it and tries to change its flow. That being said though, what often isn't touched is that you can actually use catalyst both ways. You can start off using catalyst negatively, and then eventually release it back in to acceptance. Like snatching a fish out of a river and then putting it back. Of course, it's not always so simple if you decide to consume the fish.
In this idea though, we have the idea of bending realities, if catalyst is the cascading flow of reality as it marches towards consciousness then when that consciousness grabs hold and changes the direction of that catalyst it is effectively a shift in reality. The new flow of the catalyst is no longer the same as it once was, so catalyst brought under brief control, shifted and then released again under acceptance.
This is because trying to 'hold on' to catalyst or control it is like trying to cup water in your hands, or redirect a river. Catalyst is continuously flowing and while you're caught up trying to hold on to what you've got there is a whole bunch more flowing behind it. Sometimes this results in a bottleneck and then people will have shift, the catalyst will move and suddenly a whole bunch of stuff will happen in their life all at once.
Sometimes this back-up is for yeeears, and when it all comes down it can be absolute hell, a true dark night of the soul. What's more, is that during this time this catalyst can't be controlled, no because this is finally the release. This is the breath you have been holding in forcing its way out. It has been so completely controlled there is nothing left to control, it must flow and trying to control it now will only make it more likely you'll drown.
This can lead people to make extreme decisions to try and escape the onslaught, it can be incredibly painful, I think this is often the time when people decide to see themselves out the door, and it is very difficult and painful for everyone around.
Sometimes though, there are people who have seen this happen, they watched you fall in to the river, and they've started running alongside it, throwing in ropes or kicking down logs for you to grab. Sometimes these things may pass you by, you won't notice because you are so concerned about drowning and just keeping your head above water. Sometimes you may even think you're better off just letting yourself drown, at least it would make the pain, the struggle, go away.
For the people running along, this is their catalyst. They don't have to help you. They could simply let you drown. Would that not be the path of acceptance? These are the kinds of moral dilemmas I feel reveal the flaws in Ra's wording when it comes to these ideas, but at the same time strike to the very heart of it.
I have found, for myself, that there is always a need for balance. Total control or total acceptance, neither are actually desirable. In the words of the Sepher Yetzirah, imbalance is equated with evil. Extremes are 'evil' or destructive.
There are times when degrees of control are needed so that acceptance can find its footing again. The interaction between the polarities doesn't need to be a battle. That is what I am starting to understanding. It doesn't have to be a war. It can be a dance, it can be jamming, it can be teamwork.
The day and the night do not war with eachother but rather dance in eternal embrace, one side of each attached to the other. So too should we treat our own light and darkness and see that we are the Earth they both revolve around.
If you are driving, you have to use the brakes to control the vehicles so it doesn't harm anyone. Control is like the brakes. Too much and it becomes dangerous, too little and it becomes dangerous. It is never perfectly safe, of course, but that is how life is.
I have gone through a lot of personal difficulties over the last year or so regarding other peoples' behaviour and the extents I have gone to 'damage control' other peoples' lives. For awhile I struggled with the idea of the balance between acceptance and control. I am a person who likes to believe in people, but sometimes the evidence is clear that a person either needs help or guidance. Sometimes people ask, but then there are the many times when you have no idea anything is wrong and it's not until things get dirty that you have a chance to react.
It is in those moments that I think our own nature is most revealed to us. You never really know how compassionate you are until you're the one in harm's way, or someone you love is at risk. Fear, anger and pain can turn people in to beasts very quickly. It can cause them to make irrational decisions, putting themselves or others in danger. This is, really, the human animal side emerging in all its strength. Fighting for its very survival, or that of the pack. Sometimes, that even makes people turn upon themselves, especially if they see themselves negatively.
It is important, I think, for us to be aware of this nature in ourselves, but at the same time, I don't think it's something that can be forced. The fact is that we are on a planet with many, many individuated consciousnesses and the truth is that there is actually nothing we have control over or the ability to accept besides the catalytic experiences of our own life.
Life is ever-flowing, and even if some entity here or there puts the brakes on, it doesn't stop. So with that in mind, don't be afraid to use the brakes when you need to. If catalyst needs to be shaped or redirected, have no fear in doing so.
If something bothers you incredibly, it is not a greater path of acceptance to ignore it, because ignoring completely it is putting the brakes on. For awhile is fine, but eventually there will be smoke and maybe fire from the burn out.
By that same note, if you are so full of joy and acceptance you are ignoring the house burning down around you, you're really just ignoring the burning house.
In either example we see extremes of acceptance and control. All or nothing.
In truth, I think that most of the time things take place somewhere closer to the center.
You don't need to choose between acceptance and control, they are two states that are meant to alternate. The fundamental binary of consciousness. Rather, it is becoming aware of the states that proves useful towards observing your own nature.
Know thyself, as the old saying goes.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
