The Line of acceptance.

[Matt1]

When does acceptance become out of balance? I mean you wouldn't you tell a drug user to simply accept his drug use and be done with it? It would seem that balance is in order after acceptance meaning that one would goto a distortion that is more in tune with the original thought rather than the distortion in question. In this case the acceptance might be more along the lines perhaps of someone who is at an AA meeting or something like that with the classic standing up and saying my name is such and such and i am a alcoholic rather?

[Monica]

Good question. I think many people here at B4 misinterpret what Ra means by acceptance. They seem to think it means 'anything goes' but I don't think that's what Ra meant.

I think you are closer to it, with your AA example. It's more of a confronting and acknowledging the NOW, where we are at right now, instead of suppressing our feelings or being in denial.

Example: I had a friend whose husband traveled a lot for his job and only came home about every 4th weekend. They got married because she was pregnant and they didn't have much of a relationship. I asked her if she was happy and she gave a fake, plastic smile and said "Oh yes!" which I didn't believe but didn't say anything else.

Later, an incident occurred that brought things to a head. By that time, we were better friends so she called me, very distraught. She was crying and screaming "I hate him! I hate him!"

This young woman had been in denial for several years. Finally, something happened which got her to face the reality of her marriage situation...to accept it.

I advised her to talk with him and figure out some sort of resolution. She took my advice and happily reported that the talk went great. He was actually very relieved that she finally had the courage to confront him about their sham of a marriage. He hadn't wanted to abandon her and the child. They ended up parting ways amicably, and she got remarried later. The story had a happy ending.

Now, the common misinterpretation of acceptance would have been for her to do nothing...just accept the marriage as it was, and make No effort to change anything. That's what I see here a lot: people talk about acceptance as though it means INaction, do nothing, leave it be.

I contend that Ra's meaning of acceptance is more like what my friend did: Acknowledge her situation, quit denying it, face it, confront the reality of what is happening NOW, without whitewashing it or sweeping it under the rug. THEN, AFTER accepting the now, make a choice about what to do about it. Take action.

Acceptance doesn't mean don't take any action. On the contrary; it means recognizing the fullness of the situation, with all its ugliness, and then responding to it according to our free will choice.

My friend didn't just accept her situation and stay stuck in it. She accepted it, then did something about it!

Ra seems to indicate that acceptance is only the first step, NOT an end in itself, as is commonly believed.

46.10 Questioner: Then as I understand it you are saying that if the positively polarizing entity fails to accept the other-self or if the negatively polarizing entity fails to control the other-self, either of these conditions will cause cancer, possibly. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is partially correct. The first acceptance, or control depending upon polarity, is of the self. Anger is one of many things to be accepted and loved as a part of self or controlled as a part of self, if the entity is to do work.

Do work. Acceptance first, then do work. See, acceptance isn't the end...it's only the beginning.

46.9 Questioner: Certainly.
Ra: The entity polarizing positively perceives the anger. This entity, if using this catalyst mentally, blesses and loves this anger in itself. It then intensifies this anger consciously in mind alone until the folly of this red-ray energy is perceived not as folly in itself but as energy subject to spiritual entropy due to the randomness of energy being used.

Positive orientation then provides the will and faith to continue this mentally intense experience of letting the anger be understood, accepted, and integrated with the mind/body/spirit complex. The other-self which is the object of anger is thus transformed into an object of acceptance, understanding, and accommodation, all being reintegrated using the great energy which anger began.

The negatively oriented mind/body/spirit complex will use this anger in a similarly conscious fashion, refusing to accept the undirected or random energy of anger and instead, through will and faith, funneling this energy into a practical means of venting the negative aspect of this emotion so as to obtain control over other-self, or otherwise control the situation causing anger.

Control is the key to negatively polarized use of catalyst. Acceptance is the key to positively polarized use of catalyst. Between these polarities lies the potential for this random and undirected energy creating a bodily complex analog of what you call the cancerous growth of tissue.

Integration and transformation happen after acceptance. Again, acceptance isn't the end, but only a step along the way.

26.30 Questioner: And then, can you describe the mechanism of the planetary healing?
Ra: I am Ra. Healing is a process of acceptance, forgiveness, and, if possible, restitution. The restitution not being available in time/space, there are many among your peoples now attempting restitution while in the physical.

Again, acceptance is just part of the process, not the end-all, be-all as many suggest.

74.11 Questioner: Now, what I am trying to get at is how these disciplines affect the energy centers and the power, shall I say, of the white magician. Could you, will you tell me how that works?
Ra: I am Ra. The heart of the discipline of the personality is threefold. One, know yourself. Two, accept yourself. Three, become the Creator.

The third step is that step which, when accomplished, renders one the most humble servant of all, transparent in personality and completely able to know and accept other-selves. In relation to the pursuit of the magical working the continuing discipline of the personality involves the adept in knowing itself, accepting itself, and thus clearing the path towards the great indigo gateway to the Creator. To become the Creator is to become all that there is. There is then no personality in the sense with which the adept begins its learn/teaching. As the consciousness of the indigo ray becomes more crystalline, more work may be done; more may be expressed from intelligent infinity.

There are times when acceptance isn't appropriate:

25.6 Questioner: Could you amplify the meaning of what you said by “failure to accept that which is given?”
Ra: I am Ra. At the level of time/space at which this takes place in the form of what you may call thought-war, the most accepting and loving energy would be to so love those who wished to manipulate that those entities were surrounded, engulfed, and transformed by positive energies.

This, however, being a battle of equals, the Confederation is aware that it cannot, on equal footing, allow itself to be manipulated in order to remain purely positive, for then though pure it would not be of any consequence, having been placed by the so-called powers of darkness under the heel, as you may say.

It is thus that those who deal with this thought-war must be defensive rather than accepting in order to preserve their usefulness in service to others. Thusly, they cannot accept fully what the Orion Confederation wishes to give, that being enslavement. Thusly, some polarity is lost due to this friction and both sides, if you will, must then regroup.

It has not been fruitful for either side. The only consequence which has been helpful is a balancing of the energies available to this planet so that these energies have less necessity to be balanced in this space/time, thus lessening the chances of planetary annihilation.

[Aion]

I think that catalyst that we experience is always internalized before we are able to process it so acceptance always pertains to some aspect of the self. I actually don't think it has anything to do with 'tolerance' but rather Ra specified that acceptance or control was of catalyst. Now everything we experience is catalyst, but as I said I think we only process it once it is internalized.

So, then, I look to what I understand as the Archetypes of catalyst. I see that while catalyst is something we experience, it appears to me its real mechanism is something that happens as part of us. Thus, for example, using your drug user thought, I don't think acceptance would have anything to do with telling the person anything. I think it would more revolve around your own ability to accept the freedom of their choice, while also accepting your own concern for them. How you chose to approach this individual wouldn't necessarily determine your acceptance. You could get upset with them and be angry and this could still be a reflection of the fact that you accept that the person is doing what they are doing.

I think this is a subtle aspect of the 'peace/conflict' interplay that is often overlooked. I think in general people tend to negatively characterize conflict but I think that conflict can be used incredibly positively as well.

The issue, I think, is that people associate positivity with pleasantness most of the time but I actually don't think an experience necessarily has to be pleasant to be positive. Point in case, I had to get a cyst broken yesterday. Hurt and sent my body in to shock, was not pleasant at all, but now that it's done I have more movement and flow in my body than I have had for years it seems.

As Sun Tzu said, 'no one who has experienced war, likes war'. Thus, the key, he said, is to resolve things quickly. If there must be conflict and battle, make it as quick and resolved as decisively as possible. It is only more pain to continue war. This is why I as an individual am not particularly avoidant of conflict because I see it as being the key to resolution which leads to greater acceptance and understanding.

Conflict isn't just about physical structures, it happens on every level. I think that physical conflict is getting 'out-dated' but mental and emotional conflict is what attention is upon now. This conflict is what I would use to describe the nature of balance and imbalance. What is imbalanced is in conflict and what is balanced is at peace.

[Matt1]

Yeah i tend to agree monica, First comes the acceptance of a thought then comes the balancing of the thought. First we need to accept what we wish to balance into a more in tune distortion of the original thought rather than simply blindly accept something then do nothing. Take for example someone who is over weight, you could say that it is in balance to accept themselves and love themselves as they are but it is not in balance then to continue to eat in a way that will have a poor effect on there health, nor would it be in balance to not eat enough food to get to a models size. It makes more logical sense to me that the entity would first accept its distortions and in the process of understanding the root reasons for those distortions would then balance them with the opposite, then the opposite with the original, until balance has been found.

In the previous example you could say that one who is over weight might end up going to the gym and eating heathly but not allow themselves to eat anything yummy in a balanced way, thus that entity would have to return back to the first distortion of overeating and then back again to the heathly eating and so on, until a balance is found between the two. I think that makes some sense, However you could argue that some distortions aren't every going to be fully accepted, if i started to inject heroin i doubt anyone would say that could be balanced in the sense of taking less heroin, although i guess some people might be able to find some strange balance with it. The only balance it would seem would be to find the root distortion or reason for the addiction and balance that thought/emotion until it is in tune with love/light.

[Minyatur]

In my view acceptance on a STO basis has to do with not wanting to learn/teach for others. Part of teach/learning is to accept the learn/teaching process of others just as their choices which are not your own. Well in the grand picture, they also are your own though.

You make decisions for yourself and others make decisions for themselves, each learn in his own way and through his own path across lessons. So to me acceptance has to do with understanding the purpose of many-ness and to view others as mirror unto yourself, which don't necessarily have a need of change other than what they desire themselves. To also not view their choices as external to you but to view them as your own under their path of experiences.

There is also acceptance of self and your own distortions of which you need to work from. Just wishing to be otherwise won't help one to change. First step is acceptance of what already is, then it can be transmuted and what is not needed can be left behind. Other-selves are like self, other than they do their own learn/teaching just like you have yours to do. It works in both direction as what you reject in self is something you'll reject in every other-selves who are consonant with it just as what you reject in other-selves is rejecting a portion of yourself that is mirrored unto you.

[Matt1]

To begin to master the concept of mental discipline it is necessary to examine the self. The polarity of your dimension must be internalized. Where you find patience within your mind you must consciously find the corresponding impatience and vice versa. Each thought that a being has, has in its turn an antithesis. The disciplines of the mind involve, first of all, identifying both those things of which you approve and those things of which you disapprove within yourself, and then balancing each and every positive and negative charge with its equal. The mind contains all things. Therefore, you must discover this completeness within yourself.


The second mental discipline is acceptance of the completeness within your consciousness. It is not for a being of polarity in the physical consciousness to pick and choose among attributes, thus building the roles that cause blockages and confusions in the already-distorted mind complex. Each acceptance smoothes part of the many distortions that the faculty you call judgment engenders.

If we break down what Ra said in the balancing exercise, they say

1. Find all thoughts/emotion which you approve of,

2. Find all thoughts/emotions which you disapprove of,

3. Balance all thoughts that you disapprove of with the thoughts you approve of and vice versa.

4. Accept the completeness of the mind. Rather than picking and choosing what to experience, which creates more distortions.

You could say then that this process disfuses or disolves the factor of judgement. Ra seems to suggest that it is the factor of judgement that creates distortions.

If i experience impatience then in order to balance i would first look or become more aware of that thought/emotion in my mind accepting it and allowing it to be. Then i would find the part of my self that has patience and allow that to be experienced/accepted. I would then repeat this process until the thought/emotion catalyst of judgement is disfused. Thus stoping the cycle of judgement of approval/disapproval that will only create more catalyst.

You could then argue that anyone with exterm distortions are acting them out from an subconscious root reason or distortion that they probably incarnated to work on. So it would first be the process of finding out what that root distortion is, perhaps the person wasn't love as a child or hurt in some way for example. Then to accept that root distortion and to find its antithesis then go through the formentioned balancing processing until that catalyst is disfused and let go of, becoming more and more the original thought of love/light.

I think that seems to be what Ra is saying.

[Matt1]

Is the end process of balancing then to become unmoved by catalyst? To disolve the catalyst or thought/emotion into what i gues you could call emptiness/completeness? Until a point is reach when you are simply unmoved or not effected anymore by it?

[Aion]

42.9 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotionally charged responses to emotionally charged situations and the person who is balanced and, therefore, truly unswayed by emotionally charged situations?

Ra: I am Ra. This query contains an incorrect assumption. To the truly balanced entity no situation would be emotionally charged. With this understood, we may say the following: The repression of emotions depolarizes the entity insofar as it then chooses not to use the catalytic action of the space/time present in a spontaneous manner, thus dimming the energy centers. There is, however, some polarization towards positive if the cause of this repression is consideration for other-selves. The entity which has worked long enough with the catalyst to be able to feel the catalyst but not find it necessary to express reactions is not yet balanced but suffers no depolarization due to the transparency of its experiential continuum. Thus the gradual increase in the ability to observe one’s reactions and to know the self will bring the self ever closer to a true balance. Patience is requested and suggested, for the catalyst is intense upon your plane and its use must be appreciated over a period of consistent learn/teaching.

[Aion]

I also just realized that the unpolarized approach to emotional catalyst where it is experienced and accepted but not expressed is right on point for one of the challenges I've had throughout my life. I seem to have an issue with externalizing my internal experiences.

[Matt1]

42.9 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotionally charged responses to emotionally charged situations and the person who is balanced and, therefore, truly unswayed by emotionally charged situations?

Ra: I am Ra. This query contains an incorrect assumption. To the truly balanced entity no situation would be emotionally charged. With this understood, we may say the following: The repression of emotions depolarizes the entity insofar as it then chooses not to use the catalytic action of the space/time present in a spontaneous manner, thus dimming the energy centers. There is, however, some polarization towards positive if the cause of this repression is consideration for other-selves. The entity which has worked long enough with the catalyst to be able to feel the catalyst but not find it necessary to express reactions is not yet balanced but suffers no depolarization due to the transparency of its experiential continuum. Thus the gradual increase in the ability to observe one’s reactions and to know the self will bring the self ever closer to a true balance. Patience is requested and suggested, for the catalyst is intense upon your plane and its use must be appreciated over a period of consistent learn/teaching.

I think that is the golden cookie. It seems to be then that the outcome of balancing is not to be effected emotional or mentally by catalyst. In seems along the lines of the Buddhist idea of letting thoughts go, like clouds in the sky, accepting them and letting the clear sky to continue once more. I felt this post has cleared up some of my understandings on balancing.

The real difficultly in balancing would be finding the root distortion or reason for the catalyst i feel rather than the actual balancing act itself. How can one balance a distortion if one doesn't know what that distortion is to begin with?

[Matt1]

42.10 Questioner: How can a person know when he is unswayed by an emotionally charged situation if he is repressing the flow of emotions, or if he is in balance and truly unswayed?

Ra: I am Ra. We have spoken to this point. Therefore, we shall briefly iterate that to the balanced entity no situation has an emotional charge but is simply a situation like any other in which the entity may or may not observe an opportunity to be of service. The closer an entity comes to this attitude the closer an entity is to balance. You may note that it is not our recommendation that reactions to catalyst be repressed or suppressed unless such reactions would be a stumbling block not consonant with the Law of One to an other-self. It is far, far better to allow the experience to express itself in order that the entity may then make fuller use of this catalyst.

I think i got it now.

[Aion]

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head as for the purpose of energy healing techniques. The process of energy healing, Reiki in the case of my training, seeks to find the roots of blockages/imbalances.

The key always seems to be in some kind of movement of consciousness and energy healing seems to be able to help facilitate this. I have more and more been thinking of healing as 'assisted meditation' because ultimately I think you are actually just helping facilitate a process they are capable of doing themselves but currently are unable due to their condition.

It seems that meditation produces some kind of movement in thought and that movement in thought causes different parts of the Mind to bubble in to awareness. I think the purpose of using intention, visualization and the like is to tune the awareness so it can receive from the mind what it is looking for. Thus, the healing process allows one to do a reduction of sorts by gradually refining one's idea of the root until finally there is always a moment of breakthrough, epiphany or enlightenment where they suddenly hit the root and they realize what has been going on in the whole tree. It's a really fascinating experience to see and one of the things I wonder at during my healing performances.

[Aion]

42.9 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotionally charged responses to emotionally charged situations and the person who is balanced and, therefore, truly unswayed by emotionally charged situations?

Ra: I am Ra. This query contains an incorrect assumption. To the truly balanced entity no situation would be emotionally charged. With this understood, we may say the following: The repression of emotions depolarizes the entity insofar as it then chooses not to use the catalytic action of the space/time present in a spontaneous manner, thus dimming the energy centers. There is, however, some polarization towards positive if the cause of this repression is consideration for other-selves. The entity which has worked long enough with the catalyst to be able to feel the catalyst but not find it necessary to express reactions is not yet balanced but suffers no depolarization due to the transparency of its experiential continuum. Thus the gradual increase in the ability to observe one’s reactions and to know the self will bring the self ever closer to a true balance. Patience is requested and suggested, for the catalyst is intense upon your plane and its use must be appreciated over a period of consistent learn/teaching.

I think that is the golden cookie. It seems to be then that the outcome of balancing is not to be effected emotional or mentally by catalyst. In seems along the lines of the Buddhist idea of letting thoughts go, like clouds in the sky, accepting them and letting the clear sky to continue once more. I felt this post has cleared up some of my understandings on balancing.

The real difficultly in balancing would be finding the root distortion or reason for the catalyst i feel rather than the actual balancing act itself. How can one balance a distortion if one doesn't know what that distortion is to begin with?

I would differ slightly in my own thoughts in that I don't think it's about not being affected, but rather more that there is no energy that gets 'caught up', hence emotional charge. I think an emotional charge comes from holding that emotion already within yourself, repressing it. Thus when catalyst as energy flows through the system it 'pings' off that emotion and loses some of its energy to that emotion which becomes stronger and a greater charge is built. Release allows the emotion to flow through the self and then out once more to the One, whereby new catalyst flows in again from the One.

[anagogy]

When does acceptance become out of balance? I mean you wouldn't you tell a drug user to simply accept his drug use and be done with it? It would seem that balance is in order after acceptance meaning that one would goto a distortion that is more in tune with the original thought rather than the distortion in question. In this case the acceptance might be more along the lines perhaps of someone who is at an AA meeting or something like that with the classic standing up and saying my name is such and such and i am a alcoholic rather?

I didn't read every reply in the thread, so if I regurgitate what someone else said, my apologies.

To my understanding, acceptance is a conscious recognition/understanding/appreciation of "what is".  The recognition of truth, as it were.  So, in the case of the drug addict, they would accept that they have an addiction.  They have recognized, honestly and objectively, to their best discernment, what "is".  Now what?  Now they also discern and accept what is the true orientation of their desires with this understanding and recognition.  All these distortions are being bathed in the fire and light of clear awareness.  Part of that is the recognition that a part of them probably very much still wants to do drugs for the feelings they produced.  But there is also the acceptance of a larger part of themselves (which is the overarching reason why they are engaging in this balancing exercise in the first place) that wants to be free of the addiction.  And this sets in motion the "that which is not needed, falls away" part.

You see, acceptance does not mean that no action is to occur, because we have all sorts of desires, and those motivators to behavior and action in the tangible world are to be accepted and balanced as well.  But the real question is: is the action that is occurring a result of acceptance of who you are, or is it the result of rejection of who you are?  Are your actions toward others accepting of who they are, or rejecting of who they are?  Another way of saying this in the form of a contemporary aphorism: hate of war won't bring peace, only love of peace will bring peace.  You see, one action is rejection, the other acceptance.  One action negatively polarized, the other positively polarized.  If you love peace, your actions are simply movement towards who you really are.  If you hate war, the focus is on a condition that is not wanted, and so you feel a need to control the circumstance that you hate (so you can be happy).

So with the acceptance of their greater desire to be free of addiction, they then move in the direction of that which is truly wanted.  In my experience, any action that is taken to "get away from something unwanted" will inevitably fail in terms of positive polarization.  Because that is not acceptance, that is *rejection*, which is a negatively polarized motivation.  It has to be from the framework of movement towards what is wanted.  Towards what is loved.  You have to make peace with where you are, to get where you want to go (at least in an STO way).  

If the movement is an effort to control an unwanted circumstance, then obviously your focus is on control.  That's not love.  More like fear or hate.  The key to negative polarization is control, and it is all about rejection of "what is".  If "what is" were acceptable "as is" it would not necessitate control.  Now, having said that, both polarities still both control and accept to some degree.  Obviously no one incarnating in 3rd density is 100% efficient either way.  Not even in many of the higher densities.

But what about other people's behaviors?  Do you accept them, or reject them?  If you are trying to control what other people do, you are rejecting them "as is" and your actions, even if your intentions were good, are essentially negatively polarized.

16.20 Questioner: It would be unlike an entity fully aware of the knowledge of the Law of One to ever say “Thou shalt not.” Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

So what is the STO approach to other people's behaviors?  What does acceptance mean in that context?  In my opinion it means to not judge, and accept that there are a lot of different ingredients in the cosmic kitchen.  The ingredients are a representation of all the potentials that may be experienced.  

Perhaps some of those ingredients do not taste good to you.  That is understandable and expected.  Anything with manifest form will have opposing manifestations which are completely incongruous and disharmonious with its form.  That is duality.  One person's hell, is another person's heaven.  So you don't like a particular ingredient.   You don't have to put it in your pie.  But there is no sense getting mad at others for putting those ingredients in their pie.  Again, that's not love.  It's fear or hate.  If the ingredients were not meant to be used, they would simply not be in the cosmic pantry, or part of the cosmic self.  It's that simple.      

The STS perspective, does not accept all ingredients in the cosmic pantry.  From that vantage point, only certain entrees are allowed, and so those that would dare violate that must be policed and prevented in some way for making unapproved dishes of food.  They must be controlled.  The STO perspective is: let's make delicious food, and be creative about it, and not try to dictate to others what they should and should not partake of.  However, if they ask, you can certainly tell them what you like, or do not like.  It is the difference between guidance, and dictating.  One is a suggestion, the other an ultimatum.

So when does acceptance become out of balance?  Never, if you are doing it correctly.   

Ra: [...] It is not for a being of polarity in the physical consciousness to pick and choose among attributes, thus building the roles that cause blockages and confusions in the already-distorted mind complex. Each acceptance smoothes part of the many distortions that the faculty you call judgment engenders.