Law of One vs Polarity... Law of One?

[Lighthead]

[/url]

[url=http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?s=33]33.9 Questioner: Yes, I do. Then from this I will extrapolate the concept which is somewhat more difficult because as you have explained before, even fourth-density positive has the concept of defensive action, but above the fourth density the concept of defensive action is not in use. The concept of defensive action and [chuckle] offensive action are very much in use in this, our present experience.

I am assuming that if an entity is polarized strongly enough in his thought in a positive sense defensive action is not going to be necessary for him because the opportunity to apply defensive action will never originate for him. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is unknowable. In each case, as we have said, an entity able to program experiences may choose the number and the intensity of lessons to be learned. It is possible that an extremely positively oriented entity might program for itself situations testing the ability of self to refrain from defensive action even to the point of the physical death of self or other-self. This is an intensive lesson and it is not known, shall we say, what entities have programmed. We may, if we desire, read this programming. However, this is an infringement and we choose not to do so.

It was in the self-defense/gun thread.

Wow, that quote gave me a sense of clarity like no other. I think that that's why I'm drawn so much towards STS. I think that I've programmed myself to be tempted to choose that option if things get too tough. But if I choose that option, all bets are off basically. How amazing. Thanks from the bottom of my heart, Minyatur. I really do mean it. No cheesy gif can display how I feel right now. Lol.