Biased view of STS...and INFINITY

[rva_jeremy]

My fundamental contention is that polarity and identity are linked very closely. Asking, “To what extent is the entity consciously aware of its polarity within third density?”, is a secondary or tertiary question asked as a consequence of the more basic understanding that identity and polarity are knit seamlessly together.

Well, but remember: this whole conversation started with a guy who claims to "be STS" complaining that that polarity gets a bad rap. That's the context here. I think identifying with a polarity on that level - where you see it as a club - is a little silly (sorry, I do).

That's totally different than self-knowledge. I didn't mean to imply one can have no idea about one's polarity. The two main objections I have, in the context mentioned above, are (A) looking at polarity as being on a team, where you identify with your side and see the other side as "the other", (B) even more fundamentally, the sense in which you're using an abstract construct to limit your own exploration of self.

B is gonna hurt, but... I think we have to be very honest with ourselves when applying Ra's insights to our lives. The concepts Ra suggest are a starting point. The concepts themselves are not "the truth". Our concepts of polarity in our third density conscious minds are at best rough, approximate models of the actual phenomenon. If an identification is made too strongly with the construct as described by Ra, it's possible that the construct will impede the discovery of the genuine article within the self, rather than aid in this discovery.

It's the same problem with any thought system. To what extent do the laws of science help us understand the phenomena of the universe? To what extent do the laws constrain our imagination and discovery by limiting what we think is possible?

In my opinion, it's impossible to have a deep, personal, and relevant experience with the Law of One as specified by Ra without vetting their concepts within oneself. Otherwise, you're just going through the motions so to speak. I'm in favor of people always starting with themselves as is, and then experimenting with the concepts of the Law of One. This, to me, promises the least amount of distortion.

To put it another way, I'm in favor of people approaching the Law of One material and its application to oneself in the same experimental, scientific manner that Don approached the Ra contact. This is not dogma; take what works and discard the rest. But before you know whether it works or not you have to test it, and I'm afraid that somebody who sees polarity as an outward third density identity group isn't being rigorous about how their use the concept of polarization.

How could one acquire self-knowledge without concomitantly gaining some understanding of ones polarity?

*shrug* I can see it happening.

Of course, I know what you mean. From my point of view, a person looking within for understanding is already utilizing an intensity of love/light that implies at least some polarization.

It makes no sense to me that one could have knowledge of self and yet have no meaningful knowledge of their polarity.

I agree with that; however, as I said above, my beef has always been with the degree to which this polarity is something one identifies with in an outward manner.

My contention is that morality is, if not necessary, then an inevitable stage experienced on the path of the upward spiraling light.

Morality probably represents a common class of catalyst in third density experiences.

To emphasize polarity, in my understanding, would mean to continue in the myriad daily activities which are pointed towards those ideals associated with the positive polarity, avoiding for the moment the argument as to how truly any ideal reflects a given polarity.

Personally, when I see another in need, I tend to reach out my hand to offer what assistance I can. Is this not emphasizing my polarity?

Well, shucks, Gary. How can I say, "no"?

I kind of feel like if you find the concept of polarization to be a useful one in processing catalyst, go for it. As long as it augments and does not stand in for an exploration of oneself.

Ra has a great term for a lot of what I'm alluding to: the unmanifested self. The self without the constructs, the well into which we plumb. I'm not saying don't use a rope or a light when going down there, but be conscious of where you are and open to the nature of this well. Be mindful of the self as is (acceptance helps) and use polarity as one tool among many to see the self from different perspectives, always desiring to learn.

My personal experience, Gary, is that when I see somebody in need, I try to understand what I'm feeling. There is a sense in which that understanding can map to the constructs of STS and STO. There's also a sense in which it is more than that. I just want the whole experience, not simply the experience through the lens of Ra's constructs.

Does that make sense?

If I read you correctly, you see polarity largely as an abstraction with no bearing upon or application to the reality of incarnate existence.

LOL! No, not really. It's useful, but it's not primary. No outwardly learned construct is. Start with the self. The self is the measure of all spiritual disciplines and systems. That's all I'm saying - you can't *know* whether the construct of polarity works until you know the self. It's not the other way around.

Whereas I see polarity as inextricably wrapped up in our daily life and the evolution therein. Though it lends itself quite easily to abstraction.

Well, you've always been a much more dedicated and conscious student of the Law of One than I. I sort of try to understand it, but I'm totally OK with deemphasizing parts I don't find useful in my day-to-day life (or at least not consciously acting on them). I tend to use the Law of One reflectively as you do, but only after I've grounded myself in the experience without filtering. For my personality I need a concrete experience of spirit from which to draw from - otherwise, I intellectualize the concepts so thoroughly that I forget why I'm working with them in first place.

Do you honestly wonder, “Am I polarizing negative or positive?”

No, not anymore. What's the worst that can happen? I repeat third density. To dread that is like dreading surgery you need. I trust that whatever I need, I'll get. Seriously, it's not something I think about. To me, it's like consciously thinking about gravity. Perhaps I've internalized the system to an extent that doesn't *require* me to think consciously about it; I dunno, that might be true, might not.

I don’t think it’s pretentious or ignorant or naive to know your own polarity. I think it reflects genuine, authentic, irreducible, foundational, unshakable self-knowledge.

Well, I think this attitude of "Us STS folk are underappreciated, you STO types should show more respect" has something wrong with it (in the sense that I think it is a bit of the above, with all due respect to people participating in the earlier conversation - seriously, we all have our own distortions). How about you?

---

It is disingenuous to think that you can sever your participation in the culture of wherever you originate from simply by saying that you embrace the teachings of the LOO.

Just for the record, is anybody saying that? I haven't seen anything like that so far.