Human sexuality has lost all meaning to me.

[Adonai One]

It was rather meaningless to me from day-one:

Why should relationships be exclusive between two people? What really defines romanticism? A concept of property over another? A sense of intimacy? Why can't we be intimate with all people? And why would we need to own others and limit them? Why do we make relationships mutually exclusive?

The answer to the latter is 2nd-density primality. Some can't see through this, others can.

So today I am coming out of the closet: I am willing to fall in love with anyone and anything. A relationship with a sense of property and limitation is not my calling. I will never limit a partner to only being in love with me for they should be able to love all the people they wish to be with, for any fear of this is a fear of being unloved. If they begin to ignore me, that was their will and freewill to me is paramount.

This may leave me without a "romantic partner" for the rest of my life but so be it, for I know true unity between all things will have its time. And my sense of micro-cosmic unity can exist in any moment without a human concept of a lover.

So in human political terms, I am a polygamous bisexual. Perhaps pansexual? I have no idea. I don't care. All I know is that I want to love all things without limitation. And it seems this concept pervades through the higher-densities.

[xise]

Food for thought:

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.

May we ask if there may be any brief queries before we leave this instrument?

---

One thing I find amazing about reading Ra, is how many times the Creator, via sub-logoi, goes through trial and error. And while theory is important, I think it really is a real hint as to the usefulness of empiricism and observing in practice how things work in our own personal spiritual evolution.

[Ankh]

Why should relationships be exclusive between two people? What really defines romanticism? A concept of property over another? A sense of intimacy? Why can't we be intimate with all people? And why would we need to own others and limit them? Why do we make relationships mutually exclusive?

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.

As you can read above, mated relationship between a male and a female is something which is offered as a bias to us, due to previous experiences. The harvest of these experiences was that a greater polarization occurs if the mating is not indiscriminate. This is a characteristic of a more disciplined personalities, and also of higher densitites. However, as Ra says, it is only a bias. Free will is paramount.

The answer to the latter is 2nd-density primality.

There are some of your second-density fauna which have instinctually imprinted monogamous mating processes. The third-density physical vehicle which is the basic incarnational tool of manifestation upon your planet arose from entities thusly imprinted, all the aforesaid being designed by the Logos.

The free will of third-density entities is far stronger than the rather mild carryover from second-density DNA encoding and it is not part of the conscious nature of many of your mind/body/spirit complexes to be monogamous due to the exercise of free will. However, as has been noted there are many signposts in the deep mind indicating to the alert adept the more efficient use of catalyst. As we have said, the Logos of your peoples has a bias towards kindness.

As you can read above, we developed from the monkeys who were monogamous. It was design of our sub-logos. But free will is far stronger, as Ra says, than this carryover from second density DNA encoding.

[Adonai One]

Thank you both for this food for thought.

Heh, it seems I am simply rebelling against something I find odd. I do feel embarrassed for whatever reason.

[spero]

It was rather meaningless to me from day-one:

Why should relationships be exclusive between two people? What really defines romanticism? A concept of property over another? A sense of intimacy? Why can't we be intimate with all people? And why would we need to own others and limit them? Why do we make relationships mutually exclusive?

The answer to the latter is 2nd-density primality. Some can't see through this, others can.

So today I am coming out of the closet: I am willing to fall in love with anyone and anything. A relationship with a sense of property and limitation is not my calling. I will never limit a partner to only being in love with me for they should be able to love all the people they wish to be with, for any fear of this is a fear of being unloved. If they begin to ignore me, that was their will and freewill to me is paramount.

This may leave me without a "romantic partner" for the rest of my life but so be it, for I know true unity between all things will have its time. And my sense of micro-cosmic unity can exist in any moment without a human concept of a lover.

So in human political terms, I am a polygamous bisexual. Perhaps pansexual? I have no idea. I don't care. All I know is that I want to love all things without limitation. And it seems this concept pervades through the higher-densities.

i think you'll find that depending on the people you surround yourself with, the idea of what is normal for a relationship changes. I know lots of people in the LGBTQ who have very interesting and varied veiwpoints on relationships and they are not always confined between two people. Same goes for heterosexual relationships and everything in between and beyond. I very much doubt that your viewpoint will leave you without a romantic partner for the rest of your life, but in order to find a partner that shares similar feelings you may have to broaden your interactions with groups beyond those you normally interact with. Luckily there is the internet.

That being said there is also the notion that sexuality will in fact refer to something sexual occurring. So if you go around telling people you're bisexual or pansexual dont be surprised if you start receiving propositions for sexual acts, especially on the internet.

In addition, there may not be any need to label or confine yourself to a category at all and sexuality for you might not even entail physical sexual acts but the relationship side of the equation. The labels can be useful in interacting with other people but they have their own problems as well.

[Adonai One]

...and of what you may call higher densities.

I thought beings become more androgynous towards higher-densities? How else will all things unite with the creator? When Ra mentions "bisexual reproduction" what is he referring to?

http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=bisexual

[xise]

Thank you both for this food for thought.

Heh, it seems I am simply rebelling against something I find odd. I do feel embarrassed for whatever reason.

Free will. You got it. Feel free to use it!!

[GentleReckoning]

Thank you both for this food for thought.

Heh, it seems I am simply rebelling against something I find odd. I do feel embarrassed for whatever reason.

Alternatively, your time spent in 3d may have been prior to this bias. Or you may not be 'local', and so may be affected by a prior bias.

[Unbound]

My friend, it appears you have fallen in love with infinity, the infinity that is the self and is one. Can't you see the humour in your unabated love of loving all things and the emotion and mental movement which causes you to act in accordance with the pursuit of that love? You are practicing what you say is unnecessary.

Do you truly love anything or even the Creator if you cannot simulate that love in its most natural form, one to one in ratio?

I am speaking only in terms of my own seekings, of course. I suppose those are a part of the Creator as well, though. Glad to be one with you! Remember, if you choose to be one, one can see you, the one has infinite eyes.

---

Your path seems like a very interesting adventure to take.

[Adonai One]

My friend, it appears you have fallen in love with infinity, the infinity that is the self and is one. Can't you see the humour in your unabated love of loving all things and the emotion and mental movement which causes you to act in accordance with the pursuit of that love? You are practicing what you say is unnecessary.

Do you truly love anything or even the Creator if you cannot simulate that love in its most natural form, one to one in ratio?

I am speaking only in terms of my own seekings, of course. I suppose those are a part of the Creator as well, though. Glad to be one with you! Remember, if you choose to be one, one can see you, the one has infinite eyes.

---

Your path seems like a very interesting adventure to take.

Heh, let's see if I can understand you, Tanner. What exactly have I said is unneccessary?

As for your latter question, it seems I prefer a bit of "spice" in my relationships with this world. I don't want to aim for clear-cut paths in life but things that bring adventure, shock, excitement. My seeking in this regard, if done in full course, would certainly bring that.

I have been called an adventurer when people look at my origins. Adventure could probably be a good way to describe my purpose here.

[Ankh]

...and of what you may call higher densities.

I thought beings become more androgynous towards higher-densities?

Yes, my understanding is the same. That the mind/body/spirit complexes become androgynous in the mid-sixth density, when they unite with Higher Self. However, in fifth density, entities learn magic, and how to shape their physical manifestation. But I don't know if they are "born" into space/time incarnations with a specific "gender" which then follow them for the rest of that incarnation, or if they are born androgynous.

What is interesting is what Ra says here:

Energy transfers only take place in fourth, fifth, and sixth densities. These are still of what you would call a polarized nature. However, due to the ability of these densities to see the harmonies between individuals, these entities choose those mates which are harmonious, thus allowing constant transfer of energy and the propagation of the body complexes which each density uses. The process is different in the fifth and the sixth density than you may understand it. However, it is in these cases still based upon polarity.

Here Ra says that energy transfers are still based upon polarity in the above mentioned densities. These processes are different in fifth and sixth densities though. Since Ra is now seeking beyond polarity, which happens in mid-sixth density, maybe beyond this point, the "gender" disappears too, and beings become androgynous? Or it could also happen in fifth density.

When Ra mentions "bisexual reproduction" what is he referring to?

http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=bisexual

I think that this quote may be interesting:

We used the term to indicate that in your bisexual natures there is that which is of polarity. This polarity may be seen to be variable according to the, shall we say, male/female polarization of each entity, be each entity biologically male or female. Thus you may see the magnetism when two entities with the appropriate balance, male/female versus female/male polarity, meeting and thus feeling the attraction which polarized forces will exert, one upon the other.

This is the strength of the bisexual mechanism. It does not take an act of will to decide to feel attraction for one who is oppositely polarized sexually. It will occur in an inevitable sense giving the free flow of energy a proper, shall we say, avenue. This avenue may be blocked by some distortion towards a belief/condition which states to the entity that this attraction is not desired. However, the basic mechanism functions as simply as would, shall we say, the magnet and the iron.

My understanding is that each biological male has a male/female polarization and each biological female has a female/male polarization. When these two meet, and they have appropriate balance between these polarities, there occurs instant magnetism. So, my understanding of Ra's "bisexual reproduction" is, put in other words - just simply a sexual reproduction.

[Unbound]

Aha you say limitation is unnecessary it seems, but, of course, that is just my interpretation of your words. Perhaps I am incorrect in my distortion aha

I understand where you are coming from, for a long time I felt like I needed the same, but really, as I have ventured further in to the thought realm of the sacred it has also stretched to sexuality and there is great beauty in a devotion of service to another in mutual love and support. I have a male body, I have found my goddess in a female body and through our love comes a grand adventure for us and an imprint of memory exponentially being made stronger as we delve deeper and deeper in to eachother's spirits. To me, intimacy is most special when it is a little bit of a secret, a little bit of a mystery to the world. A secret between lovers, this is how I am seeking to know the Creator, and with it I get to explore an entire infinity to explore!

I love being in love, at first it scared me, because I didn't really know what I was experiencing, but now it is becoming such a natural flow within me that I am beginning to be one with my knowingness, not needing to think, as being and doing become one.

---

Also, have all the adventure you desire! I am all down for adventure, and every adventure is different and if you look the right way everything is also an adventure aha

[Ankh]

Adonai One, I just want to add that I think that I understand what you mean in general.

Think for instance of the great wave of Wanderers that came here for not so long ago, which we call the "Hippie generation". They were liberal in their sexuality, and many of them tried to live in so called "open relationships" and "hippie communities" where these entities had sexual interactions with others than their mates.

I believe that these "hippies" had memories of social memory complexes, and this is what they sought by creating these communities. I also believe that what these entities sought by having sex with others than their mates, is to be of service to others, thus offering themselves sexually outside their mated relationships.

However, the distortions of third density are many - again, in my belief - and it doesn't work as the mind sometimes envisions way too idealistic views which doesn't manifest in desired ways. Also, unprocessed issues arise when your mate is having sex with others.

I also believe that in order to progress in the evolution of its own mind/body/spirit complex, and in order to accomplish a greater polarization, there has to be some kind of "price" to be paid, or a *great* investment perhaps to be made, into a mated relationship with *one* mate.

I could be wrong though... But this is what I seek myself for now.

[xise]

I see the free sex movement as the liberation of the orange center from the remnants of the Victoria and other eras where sexuality was bad. I also think it had components of green, but I think orange was the main component.

But if you are going to be exploring sacred sexuality, vibrating green, then blue, and hopefully eventually indigo and violet and achieving sexual fusion, that doesn't come with just anyone. Note tht Ra said that it is rare for the blue to be immediately pierced unless two entries have worked together in another lifetime.

There's nothing wrong with free sexuality. Red, orange, yellow and green ray expression between two free people who just met is wonderful. It's just that sacred sexuality between two seekers mated in an exclusive relationship, where they are doing blue, indigo, and maybe even violet ray work is even more beautiful to behold.

Can't wait till I find that special someone. It's gonna be awesome!

[Hototo]

Eeehhh. Define repressed. Our current society has a lot more stringent legal system with regard to sexuality in all matters except homosexuality than the victorians ever did.

Edit: But I suppose requiring other peoples to have as a source for blame as a reasoning for our movement is always convenient, even if that group can no longer reply due to being time/space separated from our space/time. But still, I see the free sex movement as a movement by women to get free sex. And it worked well. Everyone is having more free sex, and prostitution is criminalized, which kind of was the agenda.

[xise]

Oh I don't disagree sex is mad repressed now. And maybe the hippie thing wasn't a pushback from Victorian attitudes but I see it as an orange ray pushback to all that repression that was there for whatever reason, and is still there today.

[Hototo]

Victorian.



American.

That is all I'm saying.

In closing:

---

Oh I don't disagree sex is mad repressed now. And maybe the hippie thing wasn't a pushback from Victorian attitudes but I see it as an orange ray pushback to all that repression that was there for whatever reason, and is still there today.

I'm not entirely sure anyone has any idea what repression is anymore and that we should all just focus on having a good time without irritating each other to death by pointless stuff.

[Jeremy]

But if you are going to be exploring sacred sexuality, vibrating green, then blue, and hopefully eventually indigo and violet and achieving sexual fusion, that doesn't come with just anyone. Note tht Ra said that it is rare for the blue to be immediately pierced unless two entries have worked together in another lifetime.

That's an interesting quote to me because I asked about the potential for my wife and I to reconcile when I requested a reading from Olgaa. She noted that we were a couple in the 1800's in Spain which is amazing considering most people(including Spanish people) think I'm Spanish along with my wife speaking picking up Spanish in no time just from speaking to neighbors. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that if we do reconcile, I wonder how my new found spirituality will play into this aspect.

[Adonai One]

Is it not feasible that a group of three or more lovers could achieve full-fusion compatibility?

Heh, let's just say I have thoughts on how that could work out.

[xise]

Is it not feasible that a group of three or more lovers could achieve full-fusion compatibility?

Heh, let's just say I have thoughts on how that could work out.

I think so. It'd just be harder, all things being equal, because you have more entities distortions to balance out.

But if two mates have mastered violet ray fusion, and are open sexually, it seems that have a threesome fusion would be another step to explore, although with the nature of the male/female polarity I'd venture a guess that a threesome fusion would be exceedingly more difficult than a foursome fusion involving two males and two females.

However, there seems to be something about duality, and polarity, which essentially involves two opposite charges, that lends itself to exploration in mated couples. To it another way, the smallest possible part of infinity where the Creator interacts with free will and experience itself is with two entities.

To put a third way, the concept of free will does not make sense if there is only a singular sentient entity. It requires 2 or more entities to explore. I think this is why there is male/female, and other dualities. You can conceive of a logical tri-ality, but they are more than the minimum number needed to explore things involving free will.

[Adonai One]

I see where this is coming from now.

Now, in theory, if you have a group of entities that are extremely accepting of social catalyst or perhaps "balanced," could a full-fusion relationship of every one of those people then possibly work? As in the case of a social memory complex?

I recognize this is highly improbable. This reality offers a huge amount of catalyst. But a challenge is a challenge.

[MichaelD]

I am much the same with regards to being completely open in my sexuality. I am in a monogamous relationship currently because my partner isn't yet ready for multiple partners, and I have no desire in seeking another partner anyway. I think humans specifically seem adapted to have many relationships; however, it is clear that we have a bias towards one partner whom we share most of our time with. Whether this is a product of evolution or something else remains speculation.

I think you would enjoy reading some of David Deida. He has a couple books on the topic of human sexuality. One of the few who discuss it with a spiritual flavor. Something that has stuck with me is this: ask yourself if this relationship (any current or potential) serves the world. Is this just going to serve me, or will it serve all of creation? The answer to that question will likely give you some insight.

I think the whole free love thing is great, but it is used all too often as an excuse to just screw anyone and everyone for simple personal desires of freedom and pleasure. Do you seek a relationship to serve yourself, your partner, or all of creation? It seems to me that's really the question you need to answer. The hidden bonus for the third option is you're both part of creation

[Spaced]

In my opinion sex in a committed relationship allows for the exchange of energy to move more easily beyond satisfying orange ray urges. Having sex with partners who you do not have green ray or higher connection to often leads to orange ray transfers that can be one sided and lead to attachments that can bring about negative emotions.

Plus the more you have sex with one partner the closer you become and the more satisfying and powerful your sexual energy exchanges become, moving up from green ray exchanges to blue, indigo and violet. By having sex with multiple partners it would be more difficult to build up that rapport as you are spreading your sexual energy around rather than focusing it on one relationship.

From what I understand/assume about full fusion exchanges these only really occur between twin flames, who know every single thing about their partner since they are essentially the same person in the opposite sexual polarity, and as such are able to merge themselves completely.

[Jade]

I also believe that in order to progress in the evolution of its own mind/body/spirit complex, and in order to accomplish a greater polarization, there has to be some kind of "price" to be paid, or a *great* investment perhaps to be made, into a mated relationship with *one* mate.

I have these feelings. I think this coincides with the "dearly bought jewels" Ra speaks of when talking about mates who function at a spiritually sexual level. I've always been in love with love, I've been a serial monogamist, I've been deeply in mutual love with several men (at different times... mostly.) However, whenever I have switched to being definitively mated as opposed to the interim in relationships where I'm "single", there is definitely a conscious change in functioning, when I have to "turn off' the desire to love all and focus on a mate.

I've been trying to filter this through the distortions of society when it comes to mated relationships, since society puts paramount the family and the love for the mated partner, at the expense of not loving other souls.

I presume a completely awake couple could do a lot of sexual work together, but I think it would have to be the focused goal of the relationship, and not just a dalliance in lovemaking.

[xise]

I've been trying to filter this through the distortions of society when it comes to mated relationships, since society puts paramount the family and the love for the mated partner, at the expense of not loving other souls.

I also think society tends to promote conditional love and self-love as the paradigms of familial love, rather than heart based unconditional love.

As an extreme example of this, cold narcissists often love their children a lot - they identify their children as the self.

[Karl]

I don't partake in sexuality at this time.

[Hototo]

My friend, it appears you have fallen in love with infinity,

Agree entirely.

the infinity that is the self and is one. Can't you see the humour in your unabated love of loving all things and the emotion and mental movement which causes you to act in accordance with the pursuit of that love?

Oh absolutely, that's one of the few things that I do see, the humor in this, when my friends call me to complain after their breakup of having baked the bacon if you catch my drift for 4 hours straight and now have what appear to be burn marks and skin blisters on their Panama Manhandle.

Or would that be the Mississippi because it was noticed as they say in Hollywood, the day after tomorrow.

Anyway. I see much humor in all things, especially the love of the self. Which you also are.

You are practicing what you say is unnecessary.

Oh absolutely. I am just saying that I will eventually be able to stop practicing it as well, but that by practicing this unnecessary thing. I can prevent the practice of dozens of unnecessary things.

Or so I believe is the gist of this line of thinking?

Do you truly love anything or even the Creator if you cannot simulate that love in its most natural form, one to one in ratio?

I have no need to simulate any love. I have only a need to ask for love to appear and leave the rest to faith and other such illusions.

I am speaking only in terms of my own seekings, of course. I suppose those are a part of the Creator as well, though. Glad to be one with you! Remember, if you choose to be one, one can see you, the one has infinite eyes.

---

Your path seems like a very interesting adventure to take.

Choose the be the one. Huh, tell me when you choose to be made of protons.

[Alex Zachary]

Do you love me too, Adonai 1?

[Hototo]

I have to love everyone don't I. I get stuck in "hell" otherwise..

[Jeremy]

To me and this is just my opinion but it sounds as if you haven't had the pleasure of meeting someone who would turn your entire existence upside like a true love will. It's such an earth shattering event, one wonders how they ever functioned prior to it. It's a metaphorical completion of a circle of existence that you never even contemplated as being a possibility. Yet when it happens, you truly are left in awe as to the immeasurable amount of energy and love that is felt and reciprocated.

Even though many of us have already figured out that we love to serve others, this drive is increased exponentially when one finds their mate or eventually has a child. There is this insatiable desire to please and serve this other self in ways that words cannot express. It's pure unadulterated love in its entirety.

Here is something I wrote about someone very special to me. Though it didn't work out between us, the feelings were nevertheless genuine. They depict exactly what it's like when you're with someone you connect with on a spiritual, sexual, and emotional level.


When I look at you, I not only look at the you that all others see but the you that most don't see.

The you that only a word such as luminescence would describe the true power of the brightness of your soul.

A soul that which can be best described as a sacred ambrosia.

An ambrosia so sweet and pure, I yearn for the never ending feeling of ecstasy I feel when I get the pleasure of obtaining even the slightest of tastes.

When our lips touch, it's as if the Creator first snapped his proverbial fingers that created the big bang.

A bang so profound and mind altering, it literally shakes me to my core.

A core that at one time was completely desolate due to the past but that which has been filled with the recognition and admiration of the feelings that were once believed to never reappear yet appeared at the most surprising of times.

When our bodies rub together, it's as if the finest of violinists played with such harmonious vigor, the planets aligned themselves along the octaves of a musical measure to that which the finest of composers could ever hope to imagine.

A symphony of emotions steadily rising as the spiritual and sexual energy is passed from me to you and you to me.

An energy so complex and orgasmic, I am left in utter awe of the experience that one can only liken to an awakening.

An awakening that not only breaths even more life in to each other but further ignites the spiritual and emotional love for each other.

This love that reverberates while we lay next to each other while struggling to catch our breath, is a love that can be best described as the look that we give to each other r as we gaze in to each others eyes.

A gaze of not only orgasmic joy, but a gaze of each others true intent.

An intent of acceptance without reservation.

A truth that we can revel in together.

Because together, that which at one point seemed impossible to both, now not only seems possible but most probable.