An Apology to The Original Thought

[anagogy]

Given the Ra quote you provided, it does make sense to associate "falsity" with negative polarity. It is "distortion" that I find inappropriate to use in the same context.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think of distortion as pretty much every "thing" that is not the OIC in it's totality.

Falsity = that which is not

There isn't an illusion or distortion that is not of the Creator. Every "thing" is a "distortion", but there is no such thing as "falsity".

"Falsity" is only appropriate in a specific context like the Ra quote you provided.

I think it would be a bad idea to think of them as interchangable.

I think I see where our definitions diverge.  Let me explain the difference in how I see it:

A distortion is exactly that, "distorted".  It is not how it actually is.  It is a warped, illusory image of how things are.  So any "distortion" or "thing" is, to some degree, "false" because "that which is" is not accurately represented by said distortion.  As an example: you look into a pond.  There are gems on the bottom of the pond, but you cannot see them clearly as they actually are because there are waves on the surface distorting the true image.  This is *exactly* like the "distortions" that make up our existence.  You are seeing very real things, but incompletely.  So everything in our world, is a mixture of falsity and truth.  So I can agree that, in reality, there is no such thing as "falsity", but there is also no such thing as "distortion".  

But there *appears* to be, because of our flawed and incomplete perception of the wholeness of the universe.  All illusions, regardless of what they are, are dependent on this partial perception.  We are only seeing part of the real picture.

It is also a defining characteristic of STO. You can't define service to others if there isn't already an accommodating illusion / distortion to manifest the said "others".

I would not try to define one polarity with a specific illusion / distortion just because it is "more heavily" dependant on the said illusion than it's positive counterpart.

Now that I look at it, this Ra quote seems a bit illogical to me. How can they say that STS is "more heavily" dependant on seperation than STO? How does "more heavy" work in this context? Especially when neither STS nor STO is possible without seperation.

Either I'm missing something, or they're having difficulties with our primitive language.

Ra may have referred to STS as "path of seperation", but that just doesn't resonate with me. Service to self is enough. I prefer concise definitions.

The reason why it is "more heavily" dependent on the illusion of separation is for the same reasons I've repeatedly said: it is the path of that which is not, the path of falsity.  Again, it doesn't mean they are less intelligent than STO, or less powerful, it just means that the negative path derives its POWER of influence from separation (which is illusion created by perception).  And the STO path derives its POWER of influence from unity.  It is the cosmic interplay of light and dark.  Falsity and truth are both very powerful.  One deliberately obscures, and one deliberately reveals (in relation to others).

I just don't understand how you can casually make such assumptions about what an STO/STS entity wants, or is thinking and feeling. Maybe you "just know" that kind of thing as a consequence of your intuition.

Do you believe that all STO entities invariably want to end their illusion at some point of their existence? Does every single Higher Self seek to "Return" at all times, or do they merely want to serve the Creator and end up Returning as a natural course of events? I am inclined to believe the latter option myself.

All I know is what Ra has said, and implied, and also yes, what my intuition tells me.  I assure you, there is nothing casual about that conclusion.  Given those caveats, it is my understanding the more polarized you are on either path, the more spiritual mass you are gathering which has power to do work in consciousness.  Basically the more polarized you are, the closer to the creator you are (even though the creator is essentially polarity less).  Basically absolute service to others is the same as absolute service to self.  The only problem is, according to Ra, is that you can't actually achieve absolute service to self due to spiritual entropy (which is the resistance to unity).  That is why they switch to positive at the end.

And absolute service to others, and absolute service to self, is identical to no polarity whatsoever, because in the "absoluteness" everything becomes unified to the point where there are no others (and perhaps even no self as we commonly understand it -- which is why I don't believe STS is any more logically consistent in the grand scheme of things).

I think that the closer you get to the creator, the more you want to return, similar to how the closer one magnet gets to another magnet the stronger the attraction.  And throughout the Ra material there is a great emphasis on both paths "seeking the creator" in their own ways.  I believe outside this mortal shell, all beings will have a yearning to return to the creator but they cannot until they are of the same vibration which is what this polarity business is all about from my perspective.

"I am Ra. Although this is correct it is not as perceptive as the notice that the Priestess, as this figure has been called, sits within a structure in which polarity, symbolized as you correctly noted by the light and dark pillars, is an integral and necessary part. The unfed mind has no polarity just as intelligent infinity has none. The nature of the sub-sub-sub-Logos which offers the third-density experience is one of polarity, not by choice but by careful design."

"I am Ra. The Law of One, though beyond the limitations of name, as you call vibratory sound complexes, may be approximated by stating that all things are one, that there is no polarity, no right or wrong, no disharmony, but only identity. All is one, and that one is love/light, light/love, the Infinite Creator."

"Ra:In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time."

"Ra:We seek now without polarity."

I'm familiar with all those quotes, and I think perhaps we are having a semantic discussion at this point.  No polarity.  I agree.  However, I think it would be simplest for me to clarify my position by simply saying that the absence of polarity, does not mean the absence of positivity.  But it does equate to the absence of negativity. Explanation below:

Perhaps it would be best for us to just say polarity is a concept that only relates to interactions with other selves.  So in the absence of other selves, there is no polarity.  But in the absence of separation, there can only be harmony (which for me, is another word for "positivity" -- if you have a different vernacular I apologize for my definitions being confusing).

"Ra: We spoke to one who heard and understood and was in a position to decree the Law of One. However, the priests and peoples of that era quickly distorted our message, robbing it of the, shall we say, compassion with which unity is informed by its very nature. Since it contains all, it cannot abhor any."

Anyway, hopefully we've finally found some common ground of understanding on this intriguing topic. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.