simplifying STO and STS

[upensmoke]

I have always viewed STO and STS in a very simple manner of "Treat others How you would like to be treated." or "do onto others as you would want done onto yourself." To elaborate a STO entity would treat otherselfs in the same manner that they would like to be treated, while a STS entity would disregard such a notion thinking its ok to treat an other-self in a manner that they wouldn't want to be treated in. 

My reasoning is that by treating others the same way you would like to be treated is the equivalent of practicing oneness with otherselfs. by treating other how you would treat yourself, you view otherselfs as no different then yourself. There is no separation of self. when you don't treat otherselfs as yourself there is a disconnect or separation of self. You will begin to view otherselfs as less then to yourself, and will eventually begin to justify the use of them for your own benefit regardless of the fact that you would be treating them worse then how you would like to be treated yourself. you will create a separation. 

please understand when i say separation, it does not imply that the being is unaware of the unity in all things and love, but rather it is aware of the unity of all things and love, but it choose to exist separate of it. the being chooses that it is not necessary to be connected  

I invite my fellow light seekers to add to what i post or to pick apart what they feel is wrong with my view. i'm interested in how others respond to my interpretation. does this vibe with you? do you disagree? half and half? all thoughts and opinions are welcome.

[APeacefulWarrior]

I'm not sure if it's necessarily a good idea to try to simplify STO and STS in such a fashion, since we're talking about things which are incredibly complex. That said, if I had to pick one single dividing line between the two, it would probably be the matter of free will. STO respects\enables free will, and STS disregards\subverts it.

I think most behaviors typical of either polarity could be seen as stemming from that basic split, in one way or another.

[Jade]

I agree to a big extent, which is why step number one is often learning to love the self - if you hate yourself, then treating others the way you want to be treated isn't foolproof. Treating others how I want to be treated was my mantra as a child. As I've grown up I've shifted more to "treating others how THEY want to be treated" because it allows for more subtlety.

One way I simplify STO and STS is acceptance vs. control. Is the action/emotion because I want to control the situation, or because I want to accept and love it? It can also be simplified to radiation vs. absorption - is this thought/action trying to add something to the greater whole, or take away from it?

[Minyatur]

I have a hard time at seeing polarity in any other way than making the exploration of love and duality of self being among other-selves (which also are self) more complete.

Perhaps an STS entity to adhere to the STO polarity would simply be infringing upon itself. It would deny his right to have his own desires as the Creator, as such his actions would radiate harmony but this harmony would not be found within itself. In short it wouldn't allow itself to be what it is and as such reject the portion of the OIC it incarnates.

Maybe STS entities do treat others in the way they want to be treated, or have been treated. Plunging the world into darkness is a way to plunge themselves into darkness afterall, to hurt other-self is a way to hurt self, etc.

[upensmoke]

I'm not sure if it's necessarily a good idea to try to simplify STO and STS in such a fashion, since we're talking about things which are incredibly complex.  That said, if I had to pick one single dividing line between the two, it would probably be the matter of free will.  STO respects\enables free will, and STS disregards\subverts it.  

I think most behaviors typical of either polarity could be seen as stemming from that basic split, in one way or another.

I think everything needs to be simplified to the point of understanding. Or as einstien put "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." 


Also I believe your dividing line is included in my dividing line. Being that and STO entity would respect free will, because it wants its own free will to be respected. so it will treat others as it would like to be treated , and the STS entity wouldn't respect the free will of others, but at the same time wouldn't want other entities to infringe on its free will. So the STS entity isn't treating otherselfs as it would like to be treated by infringing on the wills of others. what do you think?

[APeacefulWarrior]

I think everything needs to be simplified to the point of understanding. Or as einstien put "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." 

Well, my concern is that in simplifying, there is necessarily loss in meaning. A simplification of a simplification can easily start losing its relevance to the original subject. Ideological data decay, you might call it. Every person-to-person transmission of an idea here in 3D is going to be imperfect as it's translated into words and then into whatever the reader\listener thinks those words mean. With each reiteration, the statement becomes less and less similar to the original thought.

I mean, there literally are not even words for some of the things Ra tried to describe. That makes accurate distillations of the material a very tricky business.

[upensmoke]

I agree to a big extent, which is why step number one is often learning to love the self - if you hate yourself, then treating others the way you want to be treated isn't foolproof. Treating others how I want to be treated was my mantra as a child. As I've grown up I've shifted more to "treating others how THEY want to be treated" because it allows for more subtlety.

One way I simplify STO and STS is acceptance vs. control. Is the action/emotion because I want to control the situation, or because I want to accept and love it? It can also be simplified to radiation vs. absorption - is this thought/action trying to add something to the greater whole, or take away from it?

I use to simplify it by acceptance vs control but for me that has lead to confusion. But i never thought of the idea of adding more to the situation rather than taking from the situation. that's a good one. As for treating people on how they want to be treated I feel the leaves to much room for me to be taken advantage of. I treat my girlfriend like that and it can be exhausting sometimes. 

I have a hard time at seeing polarity in any other way than making the exploration of love and duality of self being among other-selves (which also are self) more complete.

Perhaps an STS entity to adhere to the STO polarity would simply be infringing upon itself. It would deny his right to have his own desires as the Creator, as such his actions would radiate harmony but this harmony would not be found within itself. In short it wouldn't allow itself to be what it is and as such reject the portion of the OIC it incarnates.

Maybe STS entities do treat others in the way they want to be treated, or have been treated. Plunging the world into darkness is a way to plunge themselves into darkness afterall, to hurt other-self is a way to hurt self, etc.

Don't you feel like if the bold part were true, that would mean that STS entities want others to infringe on their will?
 

[Minyatur]

Elros Tar-Minyatur

I have a hard time at seeing polarity in any other way than making the exploration of love and duality of self being among other-selves (which also are self) more complete.

Perhaps an STS entity to adhere to the STO polarity would simply be infringing upon itself. It would deny his right to have his own desires as the Creator, as such his actions would radiate harmony but this harmony would not be found within itself. In short it wouldn't allow itself to be what it is and as such reject the portion of the OIC it incarnates.

Maybe STS entities do treat others in the way they want to be treated, or have been treated. Plunging the world into darkness is a way to plunge themselves into darkness afterall, to hurt other-self is a way to hurt self, etc.

Don't you feel like if the bold part were true, that would mean that STS entities want others to infringe on their will?
 

Well I can definitely picture many enjoying the power game and strive to stand on top.

[Stranger]

Love (i.e., goodwill) for all, including oneself, at all times, without conditions. That is STO in 3rd and 4th densities.

STS: everything that detracts or limits the above aids polarization towards STS.

[AnthroHeart]

STO = Acceptance
STS = Rejection/Absorption

[Namaste]

It can reduced to two words.

STO - love
STS - fear

All thought/word and deed is founded in love or fear. Caring for another, acceptance, judgement, patience, manipulation, deceit etc. Everything. As long as 51% of your thoughts/words/deeds are founded in love, you've made it.

Couldn't be simpler :¬)

[Aion]

Positive polarity is the dawn as it rolls back the night.

Negative polarity is dusk as it devours the day.

Light and Darkness in interplay, the activity of shadows. The deepest darkness is within the Earth, in the Underworld. The brightest light is the Stars, making up the Overworld. We here in the Mid-World reach to one or the other and so polarize along the scale of Illumination towards the darkness where the inner light dwells or towards the light where the outer light shines. Go far enough to each end and you will touch the self, for the inner and outer meet where the polarities are pure and are One again, away from the divided center.

Radiate, Absorb, Re-Emit. Positive.

Absorb, Radiate, Re-Absorb. Negative.

[darklight]

It can reduced to two words.

STO - love
STS - fear

I would discribe STS as control and separation.

[Minyatur]

Plot twist : existence is a competition and "STO" entities are simply trying misguide the noobs.

[AnthroHeart]

STS = George Bush

[darklight]

STS = George Bush

Georgie is far below the 95% requirement.