[split] Adversary relationships, and the mated pair

[Patrick]

My understanding is that when Ra discusses marriages, they mean it in the sense of a forced marriage or at least the feeling that you are trapped if you change your mind on the relationship latter in life.

31.16 Questioner: I just need to know if this then works through the racial memory to infect the entire population in some way. Does that sort of thing happen?

Ra: I am Ra. The racial memory contains all that has been experienced. Thus there is some, shall we say, contamination even of the sexual, this showing mostly in your own culture as the various predispositions to adversary relationships, or, as you call them, marriages, rather than the free giving one to another in the love and the light of the Infinite Creator.

So when you are living with someone else and both are perfectly ok in the relationship, it is not an adversary relationship.

Also, our local Logos has a bias towards having one mate (at least one at a time ).

84.22 Questioner: Before the veil, were there— Let me put it this way: Did the Logos, or did most Logoi plan before the veil to create a system of random sexual activity or specific pairing of entities for periods of time, or did they have an objective in this respect?

Ra: I am Ra. This shall be the last full query of this working.

The harvest from the previous creation was that which included the male and female mind/body/spirit. It was the intention of the original Logoi that entities mate with one another in any fashion which caused a greater polarization. It was determined, after observation of the process of many Logoi, that polarization increased many fold if the mating were not indiscriminate. Consequent Logoi thusly preserved a bias towards the mated relationship which is more characteristic of more disciplined personalities and of what you may call higher densities. The free will of each entity, however, was always paramount and a bias only could be offered.

There is also this which is beautiful regarding a one to one relationship, including marriages.

86.20 Ra: I am Ra. Yes. Let us deal with the sexual energy transfer. Before the veiling such a transfer was always possible due to there being no shadow upon the grasp of the nature of the body complex* and its relationship to other mind/body/spirit complexes** in this particular manifestation. Before the veiling process there was a near total lack of the use of this sexual energy transfer beyond green ray.

This also was due to the same unshadowed knowledge each had of each. There was, in third density then, little purpose to be seen in the more intensive relationships of mind, body, and spirit complexes*** which you may call those of the mating process, since each other-self was seen to be the Creator and no other-self seemed to be more the Creator than another.

After the veiling process it became infinitely more difficult to achieve green-ray energy transfer due to the great areas of mystery and unknowing concerning the body complex and its manifestations. However, also due to the great shadowing of the manifestations of the body from the conscious mind complex, when such energy transfer was experienced it was likelier to provide catalyst which caused a bonding of self with other-self in a properly polarized configuration.

From this point it was far more likely that higher energy transfers would be sought by this mated pair of mind/body/spirit complexes, thus allowing the Creator to know Itself with great beauty, solemnity, and wonder. Intelligent infinity having been reached by this sacramental use of this function of the body, each mind/body/spirit complex of the mated pair gained greatly in polarization and in ability to serve.

A perfectly consensual marriage truly is a beautiful sacrament.  The only thing here that Ra is pointing out, is that if at some point the consensus is no longer there, then it should be natural to dissolve the marriage.  But as Ra is pointing out, it's currently far from the natural thing to do.  Instead it often becomes an adversary relationship where we feel stuck.

So, as a society, all we need to do is adjust our view of marriage from being "for the life of the wedded" to being "for the life of the relationship".