Caring/Compassion/Sensitivity/Tact vs Lying/Faking

[native]

Again, 15.12 has some valuable advice.

"The blue-ray center of energy streaming is the center which, for the first time, is outgoing as well as inpouring. Those blocked in this area may have difficulty in grasping the spirit/mind complexes of its own entity and further difficulty in expressing such understandings of self. Entities blocked in this area may have difficulties in accepting communication from other mind/body/spirit complexes."

Imagine believing your blue ray is strong, when in fact there is blockage which is clearly the source of disagreement and inability to grasp the opinions of others, and the source of not being able to realize when one is wrong. Honesty with the self is as important as it is with others.

[yossarian]

I think we all agree with you unity that lying is bad. The question is about sensitivity and consideration in the way one expresses the self.

When I ask myself this question it's because I'm trying to live skillfully. It's possible to express your feelings and thoughts honestly but using consideration, without lying.

[unity100]

Again, 15.12 has some valuable advice.

"The blue-ray center of energy streaming is the center which, for the first time, is outgoing as well as inpouring. Those blocked in this area may have difficulty in grasping the spirit/mind complexes of its own entity and further difficulty in expressing such understandings of self. Entities blocked in this area may have difficulties in accepting communication from other mind/body/spirit complexes."

Imagine believing your blue ray is strong, when in fact there is blockage which is clearly the source of disagreement and inability to grasp the opinions of others, and the source of not being able to realize when one is wrong. Honesty with the self is as important as it is with others.

yeeeees.

people who advocate faking of emotions and thoughts to be politically correct, should be extremely careful about it. or the ones who switch their statements and thoughts based on convenience in 2 page intervals.

especially when they go as far to advocate it to people who communicate their thoughts of emotions, regardless of the reactions from others who may go the point of dressing a lot of nonsense on them ranging from 'satan' to 'blocked' on occasion.

someone who is blocked in blue chakra, does not talk. or, talks gibberish. or, cannot find words and concepts to properly describe itself. what s/he hears, s/he does not properly understand.

it is curious to see people who are downplaying, even outcasting blue ray, speak about its properties and even go as far to suggest that they are ably detect blockages of it.

[native]

I don't recall advocating faking anything. I'm speaking of the nature when one believes themselves to be correct in all circumstances, and what that indicates. Blue ray isn't just about the ability to express. It's about wisdom/knowledge/recognition/higher levels of understanding, both related to self and other self.

Inability to perceive what others clearly see about one's self indicates blue ray blockage..."difficulty in grasping the spirit/mind complexes of its own entity.."

[yossarian]

I think one reason people may be less interested in discussing blue ray is because it is green ray that is so important for graduation.

It's the green that gets us to the next level, and if we want to help others graduate, we need to be teaching about green, because green is the salvation of third density. Love is the salvation of 3rd density. This is why it is focused on.

Green is really really important specifically because we live in 3d. If we want to graduate it's the MOST important.

[unity100]

Inability to perceive what others clearly see about one's self indicates blue ray blockage...

yes. the other selves have to be right. because, they are more than one, and they agree about someone who is voicing something inconvenient.

accepting communication from other selves, does not mean accepting what they say as true. communication relays thoughts, feelings. it does not carry a mandate of accepting what is being relayed as true with it.

"difficulty in grasping the spirit/mind complexes of its own entity.."

yes, a proper manifestation of blue, should have been accepting the analysis of someone who has switched about validating/invalidating an entire material he was supposedly relying on, about your blue, as true. such people should be experts on understanding their OWN selves, as evidenced with two page frequency in the turnover of their opinions.

[Monica]

thats what you see here in this environment. what people who are faking their feelings need is not 'love'. 'love' doesnt fix any kind of blockage/distortion, as Ra tells us. blue, does.

I'm referring to genuine caring, not faking. You don't seem to understand the difference between them.

as much as it may be distasteful to many, blue, is a color and vibration that is ABOVE the spectrum/color that is green, and closer to source than green is.

And indigo is higher than blue. And yet, an entity who activates indigo, bypassing blue and/or green, is STS.

What about an entity who activates blue, but bypasses green? Is that possible?

Or, what about an entity who thinks he has active green and blue, but is actually in indigo, and has bypassed green and blue?

let me reiterate - blue is higher in vibration.

That doesn't mean green can be left out. Ra said all the chakras must be balanced.

that situation, is unfortunately out of the experience spectrum of many here,

Not necessarily. There may be many here who are actively working on green, or who think their green is active but it still has a lot of blockages. I think it's a disservice to downplay green as much as you do. You seem to have a campaign to negate green, out of some concern to balance what appears to you to be 'too much green.'

You also seem to forget that many Wanderers have taken on the task of radiating light, to increase the harvest. Since harvest is based on green activation, this means Wanderers must help facilitate the activation of green in other-selves.

By continuing to negate green, you may be interfering with that effort. That's a disservice.

[unity100]

I think one reason people may be less interested in discussing blue ray is because it is green ray that is so important for graduation.

It's the green that gets us to the next level, and if we want to help others graduate, we need to be teaching about green, because green is the salvation of third density. Love is the salvation of 3rd density. This is why it is focused on.

Green is really really important specifically because we live in 3d. If we want to graduate it's the MOST important.

and that is the biggest misconception.

as proven by monica some time ago, activating ALL energy centers up to 7th in 3d is required for graduation from 3rd density. this includes green, blue and indigo on top of the bottom 3.

most people may or may not activate the green of yellow (4th suboctave of 3rd), but they get stuck when they get to the blue of yellow, due to inconveniences that honesty that ray requires about self vs the society, brings.

and rocking the boat in the family with honesty is the least of those problems.

[Monica]

Again, 15.12 has some valuable advice.

"The blue-ray center of energy streaming is the center which, for the first time, is outgoing as well as inpouring. Those blocked in this area may have difficulty in grasping the spirit/mind complexes of its own entity and further difficulty in expressing such understandings of self. Entities blocked in this area may have difficulties in accepting communication from other mind/body/spirit complexes."

Imagine believing your blue ray is strong, when in fact there is blockage which is clearly the source of disagreement and inability to grasp the opinions of others, and the source of not being able to realize when one is wrong. Honesty with the self is as important as it is with others.

Yes, good point. That could happen with any of the rays.

---

people who advocate faking

Why do you continue to say that? No one here has ever advocated faking.

You seem to be confusing faking with genuine caring and sensitivity to the feelings of others.

someone who is blocked in blue chakra, does not talk. or, talks gibberish. or, cannot find words and concepts to properly describe itself. what s/he hears, s/he does not properly understand.

Not necessarily. Blue blockage can also manifest as an inability to process honest communication from other-selves, and inability to be honest about one's own deeper feelings, and inability to communicate those deeper feelings.

it is curious to see people who are downplaying, even outcasting blue ray, speak about its properties and even go as far to suggest that they are ably detect blockages of it.

No one is downplaying blue. It is you who are downplaying green. Continually.

[native]

I'm not sure why you hold me to such high standards in informal discussion, and take my opinions personally, as I attempt to work out details that I have never bothered to look at before. However, with a healthy dose of honesty I was able to realize my incorrectness (what you equate with 'switching opinions due to uncomfortableness'), and progress my understanding. And as to be expected, rather than reflecting on what I said (inability to accept communication from others) this has been turned around on me

[Monica]

and that is the biggest misconception.

as proven by monica some time ago, activating ALL energy centers up to 7th in 3d is required for graduation from 3rd density. this includes green, blue and indigo on top of the bottom 3.

You have misrepresented me. I know which thread you're referring to, but you apparently didn't comprehend my point in that thread. Please provide a reference and maybe we can clear that up.

most people may or may not activate the green of yellow (4th suboctave of 3rd), but they get stuck when they get to the blue of yellow, due to inconveniences that honesty that ray requires about self vs the society, brings.

Do you really think most people have any clue as to which suboctave of which density is activated or not? And just how do you figure all that out? Furthermore, what is the point of it?

and rocking the boat in the family with honesty is the least of those problems.

This entire discussion is absurd. I say again, unity100, that you continue to miss the basics. Caring about others. That's just so basic.

[unity100]

I'm referring to genuine caring, not faking. You don't seem to understand the difference between them.

i very well understand the difference in between them. to the point of being able to recognize that most of the guidelines for expressing that caring, has been derived from politically correct contemporary biases of the society the speaker is living in at any given point in time.

And indigo is higher than blue. And yet, an entity who activates indigo, bypassing blue and/or green, is STS.

What about an entity who activates blue, but bypasses green? Is that possible?

activation != presence. one will radiate, the other will suck up that energy.

therefore, your approach of 'activation' is totally incorrect. activation of an energy center does NOT define polarity. it defines where you are working. what that energy center does in regard to energy, defines.

activation of blue with the lack of green in positive manner is not possible. someone doing that, wont stay in that center for noticeable duration of time. this goes for any positive format.

Or, what about an entity who thinks he has active green and blue, but is actually in indigo, and has bypassed green and blue?

such entities have no business discussing green/blue/this/that in a public discussion forum. they wouldnt see a dirt of a value in it to attempt it.

That doesn't mean green can be left out. Ra said all the chakras must be balanced.

yes. that is especially why, everything is not 'green', leave aside faking of that green.

Not necessarily. There may be many here who are actively working on green, or who think their green is active but it still has a lot of blockages. I think it's a disservice to downplay green as much as you do. You seem to have a campaign to negate green, out of some concern to balance what appears to you to be 'too much green.'

what experience is provided in a place like this, are outside the needs and necessities of people who are working in green. exchange of information, leave aside study of spiritual material consciously, is something that qualifies in knowledge, it is the work and practice of blue ray.

people who are in need of green work do not incarnate without having the necessary experiences planned for it, and these experiences generally end up being involved with actual people in their lives directly than people thousands of miles away exchanging information through text medium. even if some mistakenly find their way to such places, they dont stay in it for too long, or get involved with it for too long, leave aside changing what they are doing or how they are doing it for anything that is said or done there. as explained in the material, they are busy with their own ray work to the point of making wrong choices even if someone tells a lot of stuff to them in person directly.

You also seem to forget that many Wanderers have taken on the task of radiating light, to increase the harvest. Since harvest is based on green activation, this means Wanderers must help facilitate the activation of green in other-selves.

you were the one who showed that for harvest it was necessary to activate all energy centers up to 7 in positive spectrum, in positive fashion. dont come up now saying that harvest is based on green activation. it isnt. saying as such is another reason why we are discussing this at this point here, and why i am 'downplaying' the 'green'speak this much - the very person who had showed that all energy centers need to be active and positive in 3d for positive harvest, comes up telling that 'harvest is based on green', totally ignoring 4 non-constant energy centers that are present in 7 aside from the 4th.

harvest is based on 51% positive emissions, and this requires activating all the energy centers in a positive fashion. you have showed this. . and when someone doing that comes up uttering a fantastic statement like 'harvest is based on green', yes, downplaying 'green' becomes a necessity.

---

This entire discussion is absurd. I say again, unity100, that you continue to miss the basics. Caring about others. That's just so basic.

and ?

so we should oblige with requirements of contemporary biases of a particular culture and FAKE our reactions or repress them ?

---

I'm not sure why you hold me to such high standards in informal discussion, and take my opinions personally, as I attempt to work out details that I have never bothered to look at before. However, with a healthy dose of honesty I was able to realize my incorrectness (what you equate with 'switching opinions due to uncomfortableness'), and progress my understanding. And as to be expected, rather than reflecting on what I said (inability to accept communication from others) this has been turned around on me

that case was a good case example. your situation may be different now, but the case you demonstrated works great for examination. the irony is, despite the case and your claimed realization about it, you are still flinging analysis on blue ray.

[Monica]

I'm referring to genuine caring, not faking. You don't seem to understand the difference between them.

i very well understand the difference in between them.

I really don't think you do.

to the point of being able to recognize that most of the guidelines for expressing that caring, has been derived from politically correct contemporary biases of the society the speaker is living in at any given point in time.

As I said before, you seem to be confusing expression of caring with the actual caring itself.

As evidenced by your example of the child in another culture who laughs when her mother tells her she can't sing, and sing anyway.

That shows a missing of the point. In that other culture, the mother may have hurt the child in some other way, instead of singing. The point is about the insensitivity to hurting the child. That can be done myriad ways, and will vary from culture to culture.

therefore, your approach of 'activation' is totally incorrect. activation of an energy center does NOT define polarity. it defines where you are working. what that energy center does in regard to energy, defines.

Maybe I used the wrong term. Instead of activated, how about, unblocked? If an entity has been working in green, to the point of clearing most blockages, then the green will be brilliant and manifestation of that will be...love, compassion, caring.

activation of blue with the lack of green in positive manner is not possible. someone doing that, wont stay in that center for noticeable duration of time.

I agree with you on this point, regarding blue. But for indigo, that does indeed happen and is the hallmark of STS polarization.

Or, what about an entity who thinks he has active green and blue, but is actually in indigo, and has bypassed green and blue?

such entities have no business discussing green/blue/this/that in a public discussion forum. they wouldnt see a dirt of a value in it to attempt it.

Not necessarily. STS entities often pose as STO. And, STO's who are genuinely seeking, might simply not be aware of their own blockages.

Interestingly, unity, you actually seem to do the very thing you just said: You seem to have zero interest in discussing love, compassion, and caring.

This seems unbalanced to me. I can understand occasionally downplaying green, to balance out a particular discussion, but you have been downplaying green continuously since you joined the forum.

yes. that is especially why, everything is not 'green', leave aside faking of that green.

See? There you go again.

what experience is provided in a place like this, are outside the needs and necessities of people who are working in green. exchange of information, leave aside study of spiritual material consciously, is something that qualifies in knowledge, it is the work and practice of blue ray.

That may be what you derive from this community, but what makes you think you can speak for others?

people who are in need of green work do not incarnate without having the necessary experiences planned for it, and these experiences generally end up being involved with actual people in their lives directly than people thousands of miles away exchanging information through text medium. even if some mistakenly find their way to such places, they dont stay in it for too long, or get involved with it for too long, leave aside changing what they are doing or how they are doing it for anything that is said or done there. as explained in the material, they are busy with their own ray work to the point of making wrong choices even if someone tells a lot of stuff to them in person directly.

Have you done a full study to determine that? Just how is it that you know, with such certainty, the motivations of everyone on this forum?

you were the one who showed that for harvest it was necessary to activate all energy centers up to 7 in positive spectrum, in positive fashion. dont come up now saying that harvest is based on green activation. it isnt.

Many of us use green interchangeably with service to others.

saying as such is another reason why we are discussing this at this point here, and why i am 'downplaying' the 'green'speak this much - the very person who had showed that all energy centers need to be active and positive

What does positive activation of green look like?

so we should oblige with requirements of contemporary biases of a particular culture and FAKE our reactions or repress them ?

(sigh)

How many times do I have to repeat that I am talking about genuine caring, however which way you choose to express that, not faking?

[unity100]

i will stop discussing with you at this point. i dont want to make you respond to long lengthy posts you dont seem to respond to.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Wouldn't asking someone to express themselves in another way besides exactly how they feel they should express themselves be asking them to "fake it?"

[Monica]

i will stop discussing with you at this point. i dont want to make you respond to long lengthy posts you dont seem to respond to.

How convenient.

A person who genuinely cares about others, wouldn't mind expressing that caring, in a way that conveys caring to the other person, taking into consideration the other person's state of being.

If I visit a foreign country with different customs, I will take the time to learn those customs, and be sure to integrate some of those social niceties, so that those people understand that I do care about them.

I wouldn't stay obstinate and refuse to make a few minor adjustments.

---

Wouldn't asking someone to express themselves in another way besides exactly how they feel they should express themselves be asking them to "fake it?"

Not if they are willing to grow, learn and change.

A man yells at his wife, and his wife feels hurt and cries. She tells her husband how she feels and asks him to quit yelling. If the husband cares about her feelings, he will quit yelling. That isn't faking. That's changing.

[Bring4th_Austin]

But we can't expect someone to change, especially for our own comfort. We shouldn't expect people to conform to our own ideas of appropriate behavior.

The husband in your example may take a closer look at his actions because of his wife and find that it is not who he wishes to be. But if yelling is how he communicates, even with someone he cares about, the wife can't expect him to conform to her feelings. If the particular situation is undesirable, it's up to her to change it, not him. She can either explore ways to not be hurt by his yelling or simply leave his company. His unwillingness to change would not be representative of a lack of care for her.

[yossarian]

Unity, could you answer my question earlier about why you don't express caring?

Ra would always say stuff about how they loved the group and admired them, positive words of encouragement, acceptance, love.

If blue ray is about brutal honesty, and you are being brutally honest, doesn't that include saying nice things too? Is it only about being brutally honest with criticism?

Why aren't you brutally honest about how you feel for us and stuff like that?

Wouldn't it be honest to say, "you are 100% incorrect, also, I love you" ?

[apeiron]

So lets say, Monicas mom was not suppressing emotion was honest, so blue ray activated but there was no green. Then, it is possible to activate blue without green.

[yossarian]

Not if they are willing to grow, learn and change.

A man yells at his wife, and his wife feels hurt and cries. She tells her husband how she feels and asks him to quit yelling. If the husband cares about her feelings, he will quit yelling. That isn't faking. That's changing.

This has been my experience with brutal honesty.

I find unity very interesting because I use to act like him. I would go around giving highly logical, aloof criticisms of other people's ideas. I would keep the criticisms purely to their ideas, only discuss ideas, just like unity does. I would tell people they're wrong, stuff like that.

I did this because I wanted to help. If someone said something that I thought was wrong I would try to help them by explaining clearly and influentially how they were in as few words as possible.

What changed me though is that people would be hurt. People would literally just break down and cry right in front of me or lash out in anger at me. I decided that my strategy was not promoting my values -- that it wasn't an effective strategy for serving others. I decided that most people did not appreciate my bluntness and did not experience it as service.

Since I had compassion, when people in front of me would start crying I would feel sorry and ask them about it, ask them why they were crying, and they would explain how my behaviour basically sent a message that I did not intend to send: the message my behaviour sent is that I think they are stupid, that I don't love them, stuff like that. Basically I was trying to offer a correction on some tiny insignificant point but in doing so I was missing the forest for the trees and was promoting negative vibes and sending a message of elitism, superiority, inadequacy, stuff like that.

It seems like unity's interpretation of this would be that I was expressing blue ray but was too weak or stupid to see that people crying and being hurt as a positive thing. I should have recognized that this was valuable catalyst for them and continued my behaviour of offering criticism without expressions of love. Now that I changed my strategy to one where I try to first help people to feel loved by me, I am failing at being blue ray and have depolarized.

It's not that I tell falsehoods, it's that I put a priority on communicating love and acceptance over communicating precise metaphysical truths. I basically believe it is more desirable and serviceful to communicate unconditional love than it is to critique people's beliefs and understandings. I also believe it is more serviceful to give people a space where someone will value them and listen to them, where someone will let them express their subjective world and will try to understand them from their own perspective. So I let people talk while I listen intently, and I value them just as they are without a desire to correct them. But in doing this I am actually depolarizing myself because I'm not sending them intellectual criticism?

Anyway I've hurt lots of people by being honest, this is comfortable territory for me. But what happens is that when I hurt them I try to understand why I hurt them, and then I change my behaviour because the simple truth is that I don't want to hurt them. I would rather modify my behaviour to avoid hurting them. But am I really just lying in STS because I don't want to rock the boat? Is my belief that I'm trying to help, not hurt, actually a depolarizing delusion?

[Monica]

But we can't expect someone to change, especially for our own comfort. We shouldn't expect people to conform to our own ideas of appropriate behavior.

The husband in your example may take a closer look at his actions because of his wife and find that it is not who he wishes to be. But if yelling is how he communicates, even with someone he cares about, the wife can't expect him to conform to her feelings. If the particular situation is undesirable, it's up to her to change it, not him. She can either explore ways to not be hurt by his yelling or simply leave his company. His unwillingness to change would not be representative of a lack of care for her.

I agree that each of us must, ultimately, take responsibility for ourselves and it's useless to have expectations of others.

However, it's also true that we all provide catalyst for one another. When 2 people agree to a committed relationship, they are essentially agreeing to help each other grow, learn and evolve. If the wife left the husband just because he yelled, then there would be no growth. It would be wasted catalyst.

If a stranger in the grocery store yells, the appropriate response is to leave his vicinity. But if the husband yells, the appropriate response is to tell him that it hurts, and ask him to do some self-reflection and introspection. It would be a disservice not to.

In a committed relationship, each person helps the other see what they otherwise might not see.

If, after many years, the husband had not changed, then yes, the wife may very well choose to leave him. But most people will choose to stay in the relationship, as long as there is good progress being made by both parties.

[3DMonkey]

I'm not caught up from last I posted. I just wanna say Thank you, Monica, for allowing a personal story to be part of a... debate*? Anyway, it makes me feel better to acknowledge you for that.

[Monica]

I'm not caught up from last I posted. I just wanna say Thank you, Monica, for allowing a personal story to be part of a... debate*? Anyway, it makes me feel better to acknowledge you for that.

Thanks Monkey!

[Monica]

Unity100, you are defining the polarities according to attributes, percentages, etc.

Whereas, I am trying to convey the essence of the polarities.

Try this:

The essence of the STS path is division and separation. An STS-oriented entity (one who is polarizing in that direction, whether harvestable or not) doesn't care about other-selves, because he sees himself as separate, and cares only about himself. Thus, exploitation of other-selves is a result of his polarity, rather than the cause of his polarity.

Whereas, the essence of the STO path is unity. An STO-oriented entity does care about other-selves, because, whether consciously or not, s/he understands that, every entity has value. An STO entity might not consciously understand that we're all One, but s/he does understand that we're all important. Thus, an STO entity genuinely cares about other-selves, and will at least make an effort to express that caring.

[Meerie]

Monica, I admire your patience and your stamina. I really do.

[Monica]

Monica, I admire your patience and your stamina. I really do.

Thanks Meerie!

[Ankh]

Thus, an STO entity genuinely cares about other-selves, and will at least make an effort to express that caring.

I agree. The activation of blue ray, for STO polarising beings, comes *after* activation of the green ray, which is the springboard.

In my understanding when green ray activation occurs, there are no such things as "ugliness", thus nothing to be *dishonest/fake* about. The songs/pictures and similar expressions, which by yellow activated entity may be seen as "ugly", are by green activated entity seen as expressions of the Creator. With activated blue ray this honesty is expressed as *appreciation*.

[AnthroHeart]

A agree Ankh. My blue ray was the last one to develop. I believe self-expression is very important for one who desires to serve.

But I must maintain balance of expressing myself, vs thinking about the needs of another, and whether my offering of expression is beneficial to them.

Or do you believe we should just offer our expression, and it's up to the other person to accept? Can I be responsible for thinking about what the other person should or should not accept?

I've got appreciation to the point of adoration. I adore creation and am passionate about it.

[yossarian]

Ra: I am Ra. The fourth-density, as we have said, abounds in compassion. This compassion is folly when seen through the eyes of wisdom. It is the salvation of third-density but creates a mismatch in the ultimate balance of the entity.

Love is the salvation of 3rd density. We're in 3rd density. Therefore love is our salvation.

It is right to emphasize love, especially when we're helping other-selves.

[Monica]

Ra: I am Ra. The fourth-density, as we have said, abounds in compassion.

Unity100, you stated that the attributes of the next density aren't found in the one below it. But this quote proves that a 4D property, compassion, is indeed found in 3D.

As I stated previously, an attribute must be manifested first, as a requirement to get to the density in which that attribute is abundant.

Compassion isn't abundant in 3D. But it's definitely found in 3D. And, 3D is where entities develop compassion. When they have enough compassion to dwell in the density in which compassion is abundant (4D) then they graduate to 4D.

Love is the salvation of 3rd density. We're in 3rd density. Therefore love is our salvation.

It is right to emphasize love, especially when we're helping other-selves.

Absolutely. It's fine if we, as Wanderers, have some attributes of the higher densities as well (like wisdom), but those shouldn't negate the very attribute we're supposed to be showing to the planet: love and compassion.