Caring/Compassion/Sensitivity/Tact vs Lying/Faking

[3DMonkey]

I'm not experiencing anything. I'm talking trash.

[Monica]

the above information basically says that, in negative spectrum, because energy blue is missing from the negative system, green/blue vibratory energies are not seen in negative system.

This is clearly an error in the transmission. That would indicate that green is present in the STS entity.

Aha! Mystery solved! Unity100 and I are both right, on the point about which rays are missing in STS.

Here's the full question and answer regarding that quote:

47.3 Questioner: You gave the values of better than 50% service-to-others for fourth-density positive and better than 95% service-to-self for fourth-density negative social memory complexes. Do these two values correspond to the same rate, shall I say, of vibration?
Ra: I am Ra. I perceive you have difficulty in expressing your query. We shall respond in an attempt to clarify your query.

The vibratory rates are not to be understood as the same in positive and negative orientations. They are to be understood as having the power to accept and work with intelligent infinity to a certain degree or intensity. Due to the fact that the primary color, shall we say, or energy blue is missing from the negatively oriented system of power, the green/blue vibratory energies are not seen in the vibratory schedules or patterns of negative fourth and fifth rates of vibration.

The positive on the other hand, shall we say, has the full spectrum of true color time/space vibratory patterns and thus contains a variant vibratory pattern or schedule. Each is capable of doing fourth-density work. This is the criterion for harvest.

And here's the question and answer immediately following:

"47.4 Questioner: Did you say that blue was missing from fourth-density negative?
Ra: I am Ra. Let us clarify further. As we have previously stated, all beings have the potential for all possible vibratory rates. Thus the potential of the green and blue energy center activation is, of course, precisely where it must be in a creation of Love. However, the negatively polarized entity will have achieved harvest due to extremely efficient use of red and yellow/orange, moving directly to the gateway indigo bringing through this intelligent energy channel the in-streamings of intelligent infinity.

Ah, so BOTH green AND blue are missing, then!!!

I missed that later quote. Thanks Aaron! It just didn't make sense to me that blue was missing instead of green. But in addition to green, I can accept that! I remembered the part about skipping the heart and going directly to the higher chakras, but I forgot that blue was skipped also. And apparently unity100 forgot the part about green being skipped. So we're both partially right; both greeen and blue are missing in STS.

I think we should both re-evaluate our understanding, in light of this.

[yossarian]

It's all the wussys that need to get over it. Fragile pansies we have to tip toe around. That was a long post that views me as anger boy. I just want to say the word stupid without invoking the wrath of Khan. 'oh, but we won't let you, we're trying to help you, we all think YOU have a problem, conform to our standards, get in your cage, we outnumber you and agree you need to change'.

I guess unity may be on to something.

You experience this supposedly welcoming, accepting atmosphere as repressive and judgmental because you aren't allowed to call people fucking idiots.

Would it be better for everyone's spiritual evolution if people such as yourself were allowed to go wild? Would that provide better catalyst for people like me and more authentic experiences for people like you?

I think it probably would. However at the same time it would make the forum a harsh and unwelcoming and unsafe place rather than a refuge. Basically it would be turning it into a different space, a space of brutal honesty and intensity like an encounter group rather than what it is now which is sort of a safe place for people to discuss stuff without worrying about being attacked and insulted. Most other parts of the world, talking about this stuff, people will just flat out call you a fucking idiot. The nice ones will just say it behind your back. "What the f*** is this retarded Law of One bullshit? God Yossarian is such a fucking gullible idiot."

Anyway 3Dmonkey, as an experiment, feel free to call me fucking stupid and the other insults you feel. If it hurts my feelings too much I'll just ignore you.

I watched the movie "The Invention of Lying" yesterday. The premise is that the world is identical to our world except everyone always says what they're thinking. So people go around saying, "I just masturbated" and "I'm thinking about your vagina" and "I hate you" and stuff like that.

I think there is some truth to the idea that this kind of world would push people to evolve emotionally very quickly. However it's really not a very safe world for the vulnerable.

One aspect of the movie was that society was divided clearly into two groups: cool people and losers. Everyone knew who the losers were because the losers were constantly told they were losers. Everyone knew who the cool people were because they were constantly told.

So a fat ugly depressed suicidal guy goes around and everyone he talks to he tells them how he is such a loser who wants to kill himself and his life is pathetic. Most people agree with him. He is a fat pathetic loser.

The beautiful successful guy goes around constantly telling all the ugly fat people that they are pathetic losers and that he is successful and handsome.

People don't flinch when they're insulted, because they're heard it before, they know where they stand.

The social commentary of the movie is that this hierarchy exists and everyone knows about it but no one talks about it.

So anyway this movie made me think a lot about unity's ideas on brutal harsh truth-telling. In a lot of ways I think it would create a better world if people just told the flat truth.

Of course, at the same time, we don't live in that world, and so the blunt truth is often interpreted as cruelty, and people's feelings can be hurt not even due to the content of the message but simply because the talker was willing to say that to them.

"I'm such a stupid loser and 3dmonkey hates me so much that he's willing to just call me fucking stupid right to my face. He cares about me so little that he's just willing to stomp all over my feelings and beliefs."

What hurts people is often not even the content of the message, but just the fact that the lack of tact communicates that 3dmonkey didn't care about them enough to use tact.

So it's a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. It's normal to be polite and nice, so people are polite and nice, and anyone who isn't is judged to be hateful and lack compassion, when perhaps they just want to help. The fact that unity isn't willing to use tact communicates to people that he doesn't care about them or even that he hates them, and this belief that he hates them is painful and hurts and overshadows the message unity wanted to send. The prevailing message isn't about communism or blue ray or whatever, but rather about how unity doesn't care about the person, hates them, thinks they are completely stupid, have no valuable ideas, and are so worthless they don't even deserve the basic courtesy of tact and politeness. Unity was attempting to deliver a blunt truth but he inadvertently just delivered a big fat hurtful insult by pretending cultural norms don't exist, by believing that tact is the same as lying.

I'm not saying the world is good as it is but I think we do have to deal with the world as it is. I still don't think it would help for me to change my strategy from speaking with sensitivity and tact to speaking with insensitivity and harshness. I can't change the culture. Being blunt would provide catalyst and misunderstanding for others but I'd rather provide stuff that I believe will support them in their personal growth and goals. This of course means honesty, but it means a sensitive, tactful, caring honesty that recognizes the subjective universe of the person and respects that universe.

3dmonkey, you're the fragile pansy, not us. You're a fragile pansy because you want to tell us we're fucking lame idiots but you're too scared to. You're afraid of us and you're afraid of the reaction you'll get. That makes you the wuss.

[BrownEye]

"I just masturbated" and "I'm thinking about your vagina" and "I hate you"

[apeiron]

"I just masturbated" and "I'm thinking about your vagina" and "I hate you"

Yeah, but have you been truly honest to yourself or just a b****?

[3DMonkey]

LOL. That's because "you are a loser".

The movie sounds funny, but not accurate. The people that would say "you're a loser" would also turn to their friend and say "I feel guilty".

"I'm such a stupid loser and 3dmonkey hates me so much that he's willing to just call me fucking stupid right to my face. He cares about me so little that he's just willing to stomp all over my feelings and beliefs."

What hurts people is often not even the content of the message, but just the fact that the lack of tact communicates that 3dmonkey didn't care about them enough to use tact.

In my ideal, you see, the listener would not take it personally because the words wouldn't hold that weight. It would mean the same thing, and they wouldn't suspect that it is because I don't care.

Actually, in the world we do live in, we know more about where people are coming from than we let on. That's what the "spirit" is. I know the spirit with which you wrote the entire post. You know the spirit of mine as well.

---

It's kinda similar to the debate between Jay Z and Oprah. He says using the "N word" desensitizes it and deflates all the negative "power" out of it. Oprah says it should forever represent that era and never be heard again. I like his take, to be honest.

[yossarian]

Maybe in this density it is necessary to clearly and specifically communicate that you care because so many people really don't care.

You want it to be assumed that you care. You don't want to have to say it. But the nature of the Earth is that caring is the exception rather than the rule. So silence indicates you don't care.

I certainly never got the impression from unity that he cared. In the abstract I imagine he does care, but it's like detective work trying to figure it out.

You raise a good point: telling the blunt truth needs to include the good things not just the insults and criticisms. If unity loves us why doesn't he tell us? That would be blunt truthfulness. I've never heard unity say he loves anyone or cares about anyone.

"You're a fucking idiot 3dmonkey, and by the way, I love you so much!"

[3DMonkey]

I tell everyone that I love them. I don't hold that back.
I love you. Now shut the f up stup__a__!

(I'm sincerely joking) .... See, I couldn't joke without explaining that it was a joke and hoping it doesn't hurt your feelings because you could very well choose to read my disclaimer as the dishonest part of my post.

(sorry Steve)

[yossarian]

It doesn't hurt my feeling when people call me an idiot, probably because I just don't think I'm an idiot. It hurts my feelings when people call me a loser though even as a joke, probably because I believe it. Compared to cultural norms I'm a loser for not being a big partier and a cool guy basically.

[Ruth]

I love you, too, Monkey. Now cut it out and go change a diaper or something!

Love & light!

[yossarian]

By the way in the spirit of the brutal honesty experiment, I think you're all wonderful for engaging in this discussion and I love you guys and I think you're all brilliant even when your ideas conflict. Because I think conflicting ideas can be equally truthful due to differing subjective realities. And so I really appreciate all your ideas even when I can't integrate them into my world view.

[Namaste]

By the way in the spirit of the brutal honesty experiment, I think you're all wonderful for engaging in this discussion and I love you guys and I think you're all brilliant even when your ideas conflict. Because I think conflicting ideas can be equally truthful due to differing subjective realities. And so I really appreciate all your ideas even when I can't integrate them into my world view.

... and that's exactly how harmony works; acceptance of everyone's uniqueness :¬)

Peace!

[Oceania]

you're cool Yossarian, in the way that counts.

[3DMonkey]

I thought I was a loser cuz I partied. Go figure.

Checked it off my list, Ruth.

[3DMonkey]

[Monica]

Man, I'm wondering how long it's gonna take to split up this thread...

[3DMonkey]

Just blow it up

[apeiron]

So, I guess is not so easy using blue, eh? One has communication, plus actions, plus honesty with oneself/others, wisdom possibly to consider, and that pesky green ray that could get in the middle.

On top of that, using imagination instead of repressing so it does not pop up in time-space unresolved;

however, considering the benefit of others into our actions/communication seems to polarize (even if just a little) towards positive at the expense of partially blocking blue if I remember well from the material.
----------------
By the way, it seems many equate expressing anger with blue ray and it seems to have more red ray characteristics.

Then, one of the tenets of STO is acceptance of the other/self and STS control of the other/self.

46.8 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.

[Sagittarius]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/articl...ds-newsxml

Interesting article on Steve's last words. Oh wow, Oh wow, Oh wow apparently.

[unity100]

Just because the mother wasn't intentionally trying to exploit doesn't mean her act is positively polarizing.

howere it means it is not negative.

Also I think you're projecting norms from turkey or something on to big parts of the world. Did you forget about Japan?

lets say i was. how would that be any different from projecting norms from america ? not at all.

You've just equated a genuine act of STO (compassion, caring for another) with a dishonest manipulation with means to control, STS!

because it is. you may think its sto because your intention is sto in faking your emotions/thoughts, but, it is not sto, and even at a lower spiritual level in regard to basics, it is negative - you are suppressing manifestation of your emotions - you are controlling them.

How does one get from neutral 3D entity to STS polarized 3D entity? First, one must move through the stages of being a jerk, of being aggressive, of disregarding others' feelings, in order to later come to more conscious states of control and manipulations.

not necessarily. i have one unfortunate acquaintance who had decided that he had to 'try' the dark side back after getting into spiritual material. he probably turned about after a while. however it shows that even conscious people can take extreme decisions.

'being a jerk' is a 2d/early 3d blunt behavior. animalistic. it does not have a purpose or particular polarization. at most you can classify it as a 2d behavior.

sts needs to have exploitation of the other entity as an aim.

No it doesn't. Exploitation of an other-self is a characteristic of STS, but not the only one.

You have confused an attribute of STS with definition of STS.

it is the only one that defines the sts polarity in regard to others. the other thing that defines sts polarity in regard to self is, suppressing/controlling one's emotions and feelings.

Now, what I was doing, is countering your assertion that being brutally 'honest' with a young child, to the point of hurting that child and squashing her joy, is somehow desirable and even, in your words, "the right thing." You seem to insist that it is correct, appropriate, and even optimal for an STO-polarizing entity to disregard the feelings of an other-self and just tell them whatever you happen to feel or think, regardless of the possibility that you might be wrong, and regardless of the probability that you will severely hurt the entity.

correct, appropriate, optimal for sto polarizing entity, is to be honest about its feelings and thoughts. even so, regardless of all the actions from others in response. however, this is a necessity of blue ray, as it explained in the material, and it may be rather hard for a sto entity even in 4th or working with 4th ray to manifest it. however, this is as it is - radiation of self, regardless of all reactions from the other entity.

the entity may be severely hurt in endless forms and ways. whereas in gaelic culture a few thousand years ago, an entity would laugh at his/her mother saying that s/he had a horrible singing voice and then move on to drink another cup of bear, in today's america it is seen as undesirable. feeling hurt or undesirable responses change with times and culture and even the person. you see it undesirable and hurting today, some others cultures or other types of characters dont. if entities were supposed to tailor their feelings and thoughts in accordance with culture, there should be no norm for honesty. which is something very important later on in in higher spiritual frequencies, as we will probably soon revisit in the course of this post.

doing whatever we can, from within our own cultural standards, to convey kindness, caring, compassion and consideration to others.

These are traits of an STO entity, and any STO entity can and will find a way to convey those traits, regardless of language barriers or cultural differences.

You seem to have been arguing that showing kindness, caring, compassion and consideration are unnecessary and even 'fake' and furthermore that brutal honesty is the 'right thing' for an STO entity.

let me tidy it up for you :

you basically are saying that the mother should have faked his/her emotions or the magnitude of those emotions to be 'caring'.

i am telling that, this is wrong. flat out wrong. faking/modifying the nature and magnitude of emotions, is NOT 'caring'.

this is what i am saying. there is no caring in dishonesty.

caring compassion consideration et al, should NEVER take the form of FAKING, lying, modifying, exaggerating or reducing emotions and thoughts, neither of the person in question or the entity it is interacting with.

No, it doesn't mean that at all. It's not an instantaneous occurrence, but a progression. 51% is just the minimum requirement. Many entities surpass that minimum, and may even have surpassed the minimum lifetimes ago, but chose to reincarnate in 3D again to help increase the harvest.

no, if you are 51%, you are harvested. this is the requirement for positive 3d harvest. excuse me bu what are you even saying here ? 'many entities surpass minimum' ? you are saying that many entities already qualified for harvest, despite Ra was saying that harvest would be too small ?

It's possible that an entity could progress very quickly to positive in early 3D. Probably not likely, but always possible.

and ? you are saying that they would manifest 4d properties in 3d ? and this should be the norm because, such exceptions MAY exist ?

Entities don't go poof and suddenly manifest 4D properties. It's a progression, begun in 3D. When an entity manifests enough (at least 51%) of the 4D properties, he is harvestable to 4D.

We discussed this previously on the Strictly Law of One > Advanced Studies > Green Ray Requirement for Harvest to 4D thread (with which I will probably merge portions of this thread).

if you revisit that thread, you would see that what you have proven there also mandates blue and indigo ray manifestation a requirement for harvestable 4d.

so, it doesnt end at 4th ray, or its properties. honesty WILL be needed in the next step.

No, not at all. Those societies were inclined towards positive or negative, but still in the process of evolving and polarizing. Had they already completely polarized, they would have been classified as 4D, not 3D.

so then you are basically accepting that 3d societies cannot be expected or required to manifest 4d properties.

Friend, I think you are very mistaken here. Again, those are indeed attributes of STS, but not the only attributes.

An absence of one or more attributes, does not negate STS orientation, if other STS attributes are present.

let me repeat again :

there are two defining traits of sts in regard to self and in regard to others :

in regard to self, you suppress/control thoughts/emotions.

in regard to other, you suppress/control others.

its about control and suppression. these are two traits that define sts. there may be a lot of corollaries that these bring, but, what defines sts as a polarity is these.

Looking at this alone, it's still STS. If Person A knows that his 'brutal honesty' will hurt Person B, but doesn't care, because he thinks honesty is necessary for his own development, then that is still STS, because he is putting his own development above the welfare of the other-self. It's still self-serving and shows a lack of green ray.

first, you cannot be honest without blue ray. and in order for there to be blue, there has to be all the other rays down below that. otherwise, there cant be blue frequency/vibration, nomatter what you do.

therefore, no such silly statement like 'it shows lack of green' can be possible, when you are manifesting blue ray. ALL the higher rays in positive, encompass and surpass the ones below.

if it had put Looking at this alone, it's still STS. If Person A knows that his 'brutal honesty' will hurt Person B, but doesn't care, because he thinks honesty is necessary for his own development, then that is still STS, because he is putting his own development above the welfare of the other-self. It's still self-serving and shows a lack of green ray.

if it was sts, she would LIE to you saying that it was great, making sure that there would be no bad blood in the house and nuisance to her on your part and then skillfully evade taking any action towards any kind of desire you had towards singing, without rocking the boat. which is what many parents do by the way.

....................

i am going to lump all of the quotes in which the same property manifests into one block below :

It's not enough to just be aware of the other-self's feelings. The STO-aspiring entity must also care about the other-self's feelings and well-being.

At this late stage, are you seriously suggesting that there are still entities who haven't even begun polarizing in either direction?

Obviously, there are still plenty of entities on the fence, who haven't polarized sufficiently in either direction to be harvestable. But even they have at least made some progress in 75,000 years. Maybe they are only 45% STO, or 85% STS. They aren't harvestable yet, but they have certainly polarized to some degree, to the point that they understand, at least subconsciously, the nature of their choice when they choose to be kind or cruel to an other-self.

I didn't say the entity was negative. I said it was leaning negative, polarizing negative.

I think you have segregated the densities too much. All attributes exist in all densities, but in potentiation. They don't just manifest all suddenly, as in poof. They manifest as the entity evolves. Different attributes are manifest more, and emphasized more, according to the density.

Again, this was discussed in the Strictly Law of One > Advanced Studies > Green Ray Requirement for Harvest to 4D thread.

You don't seem to allow for any progression. Also, we don't just magically go poof when we get to another density. It's an evolution and we go to the density we already resonate with. This is evidenced by what Ra tells us of the walking of the Steps of Light. The soul is already suitable for this or that density, and is placed accordingly. This means the soul has already developed those traits! In contrast to what you seem to be saying, which is that they obtain those traits when they are placed in that density. You have it backwards.

You are confusing expressions of kindness and compassion, with the actual kindness and compassion.

no.

excuse me, but a blunt out, flat out no.

let me tell you what you are doing - you are expecting 4d traits in 3d. you WONT find it. because understanding is not of 3rd density.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...=1&ss=1#44

16.44 Questioner: Thank you. Is it possible for you to give a short description of the conditions in the fourth density?

Ra: I am Ra. We ask you to consider as we speak that there are not words for positively describing fourth density. We can only explain what is not and approximate what is. Beyond fourth density our ability grows more limited until we become without words.

That which fourth density is not: it is not of words, unless chosen. It is not of heavy chemical vehicles for body complex activities. It is not of disharmony within self. It is not of disharmony within peoples. It is not within limits of possibility to cause disharmony in any way.

Approximations of positive statements: it is a plane of type of bipedal vehicle which is much denser and more full of life; it is a plane wherein one is aware of the thought of other-selves; it is a plane wherein one is aware of vibrations of other-selves; it is a plane of compassion and understanding of the sorrows of third density; it is a plane striving towards wisdom or light; it is a plane wherein individual differences are pronounced although automatically harmonized by group consensus.

these are the properties of 4th density, which you are seeking in 3rd density. you may also notice various quotes in which Ra mentions something like 3d being of rather 'sts nature'.

basically, you wont find the manifestations you are trying to mandate in 3d, in 3d. because, this density is not the density you are transferring the properties from.

progress exists, but that progress is in the form of 'blunt, crude' nature of 3rd density if you will. this is the density of yellow ray, and all the suboctaves of yellow ray, are derived from properties of yellow ray. so, the green of this 3rd density, will not afford you the properties you desire from the general meaning of 4th density as you so insistently desire to find in 3d. it will be blunt, crude, unsculpted. nomatter how much the entity progresses it wont manifest with the green overlaid cloak you desire.

this is why even when the entity graduates from 3d, the sculpture is rough and it requires refining in 4d :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...=1&ss=1#15

nomatter what, both the expressions of compassion and kindness, and the 'actual' kindness and compassion, will be only present in the 3d levels in a 3d entity - NOT 4d. that is a whole other density.

however you are excepting and transliterating these properties into 3d. that wont happen.

your problem may be expecting interactions of 4d, in 3d as a wanderer/higher density entity/harvestable.

Let's isolate the point here: The way she says it, her exact words, tone of voice, etc. might vary from one culture to another. Quit being hung up on that. The end result is, if the mother is uncaring, and knowingly hurts the child, that action, regardless of the words used, is incompatible with polarizing STO.

variance does not take the form of dishonesty and lying.

IF, she felt that much reaction to your song, she should express it as such. if you think she had exaggerated, that may be possible. however your issue doesnt seem to be with the magnitude of the reaction than the nature of it.

That doesn't prove that you're right and I'm wrong at all. It simply shows that we have 2 different approaches.

Your approach is very similar to the Bible-thumper, who analyzes the book and decides what he considers the 'truth' then forms a rigid doctrine. Anyone deviating from that doctrine is considered a heretic.
.........................................
you 'prove' something in the text. In some cases, about certain details, sure, but not about important concepts like the nature of STS and STO. That understanding is stamped in my consciousness. I don't need Ra to explain that to me. I already understood it before I ever read the Law of One. The Law of One didn't introduce me to STS and STO; it just explained why we have STS and STO.

excuse me, but you have still not provided any explanation in regard to basic spiritual properties i have explained in regard to how sts/sto comes into being. it seems that even tho you are apparently selectively calling incorrectness in the material, you are still accepting the basic spiritual principles it brings. i have explained how lack of blue effects negative path in basic spiritual terms. not only terms of Ra material, but in regard to general spirituality. you havent responded to these.

I believe you have...with your intellect. But have tried considering them with your heart?

considering there is no such separate concepts in spiritualism like 'intellect' and 'heart', and even more ridiculous made up difference in between the two since both emotions, thoughts, and actually ANYthing that is experienced takes place in mind as material explains us, yes.

That's mere speculation.

It seems much more logical to me that Ra asked Don to scan for errors, because Ra knew there might be errors.

You argue for the infallibility of Ra's words. Well, why aren't you taking this statement ("scan for errors") literally? Ra said, "scan for errors". Taken literally, Ra wanted us to scan for errors because there might be errors.

You argue for perfection of the source, but then you come up with a roundabout explanation about what Ra really meant in that very, very clear statement.

You can't have it both ways.

there is no contradiction here. that is a common teaching method which is practiced by teachers in daily life too.

You are evading the question. You explicitly said, not once but at least twice, that my mother 'did the right thing.' Presuming that my mother was aspiring to polarize STO, that is an entirely different issue from whether it's STS or not. I would really like to know how you can justify hurting another entity as being 'the right thing' for an STO person.

you were hurt. i wouldnt be hurt. few of my friends would be hurt, some others may have laughed.

you are putting your hurtfulness ahead of everything else. its a personal situation and condition you are wanting to be the norm/basis for everyone. it cannot.

No, she didn't. She deprived me of one of the very few moments of joy in an otherwise horrible, miserable, traumatic childhood. That was despicable to do that, knowing how unhappy I was. One of the very few times I actually felt happy, she took it away!

and what about her ? you yourself said that she was a very problematic person, a problem character. what about her, raising you, in that environment ?

you are putting your state of being hurt ahead of everything else. now, is this sto, in the terms you define it ? you advocate compassion to the point of compromising honesty, and yet you are not providing any headroom for your mother in the conditions and mental state you name her to be in, even going as far to dub her act sts ?

Tell me again she "did the right thing."

if she had not faked his reaction intentionally, and communicated what she really felt, she did the right thing.

That's different because I was older by then and no longer cared what she thought.

But actually, yes she did do the same thing; she told me I could never be an actress because I was too short.

.......

Only because she didn't have to watch my acting, since it was done at school. She never went to any of my plays, so it didn't concern her.

now we are coming to places ..... now now ...

she did the SAME thing again, but, this time, you have NOT cared about it then ? i wonder why that was ? maybe, it was because she did the same thing before, and you have experienced it ? and the next time it happened, you have not cared about it, and went on to pursue what you were temporally desiring at that point in time regardless of reactions even from your mother ?

which, from what i came to know about you from what you told about your life story, seems to be something you have continued to do all your life, giving you a rebel edge that was needed to break out of a lot of societal biases and restraints. a trait which, if was not there, would make it much harder for you to come to the spiritual, and even societal place you are in, in its absence.

and the acquisition of this trait happened early in childhood, without having to go through life-breaking disasters it would cause in latter stages of your life.

Are you reading my comments? I have explained several times that you have it backwards - her cold, calloused remarks would have been appropriate for an STS entity, but not for an STO entity.

a half-functional sts entity would be careful as to make any kind of remarks that would rock the boat. leave aside saving energy for honesty.

No, it doesn't. My mother wasn't an evil person. She wasn't blatantly STS. She meant well. She was just really messed up. That's all irrelevant.

that's relevant. you are criticizing the bluntness of an at most 2d reaction, even if it was potentially honest, labeling it as fitful of a sts entity, and then carrying out it as a norm.

...........................

all the problems revolving around this, and many other troubles of this society, stems from whats below :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...c=1&ss=1#6

The patterns of activation of an entity of high seniority will undoubtedly move with some rapidity to the green-ray level which is the springboard to primary blue. There is always some difficulty in penetrating blue primary energy for it requires that which your people have in great paucity; that is, honesty.

in the commonplace lack of something, the lack of that thing becomes the norm.

[3DMonkey]

The honest approach from the mother would have been to seek self in order to serve the other. Then, she could find her Self and more honestly say "I'm very irritated at this moment. Any noise right now is not appreciated by me because I would like a moment of silence to relax. I have a few things I'm trying to integrate right now, and these things have me distracted. My opinion of your singing involves a personal need for silence at this moment, and it wouldn't be fair to you not to communicate that. Honestly, I love you, and I will help you find a voice expert to assess your talent level. Right now, please let mommy enjoy silence for a time. I also recognize your desire to sing. How do you like singing?"

That's honesty.

[apeiron]

So the most important question at this point seems: was Monica's mom honest or trying to suppress and or control Monica?

[unity100]

So the most important question at this point seems: was Monica's mom honest or trying to suppress and or control Monica?

suppression in negative path is geared towards one's own emotions. towards others, manipulation and control is preferred. others are desired to suppress their emotions and thoughts, but not for nothing - to serve the other entity.

[apeiron]

This quote is also important:

42.8 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotional 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 in so far 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 reaction 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.

This possibly occurs due to the influence of green ray.

[Monica]

Unity, I'm not going to reply to your last post. I'm done going point-by-point and would just be repeating myself. For now I will just reiterate that I disagree with your overall interpretations of the the main principles of the Law of One. It would be a daunting task to provide enough quotes to 'prove' this to you, and even then, it probably wouldn't work anyway. If you don't 'get' it then nothing I could say will ever change that for you.

You seem to have missed the point. It's not about my mother. I've already acknowledged that she wasn't very developed so of course, now I understand why she was the way she was. What you're missing is that this is just an example to illustrate caring or non-caring. The point is about the concept of caring itself, not about where my mother was in her development.

The bottom line is that you don't seem to ever talk about caring for others. You seem to downplay and even negate it, every chance you get. You talk about caring too much, to the point of self-sacrifice, as undesirable, but I don't ever see you talk about caring too little.

This leads many of us to conclude that you don't value caring. And thus, are missing a key component of the teachings.

---

This quote is also important:

42.8 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotional 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 in so far 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 reaction 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.

This possibly occurs due to the influence of green ray.

Good find. This seems to indicate that caring for others trumps expression. This supports my assertion that caring for others is more important than 'honest expression.'

Honest expression becomes moot if the caring isn't there.

[unity100]

The bottom line is that you don't seem to ever talk about caring for others. You seem to downplay and even negate it, every chance you get. You talk about caring too much, to the point of self-sacrifice, as undesirable, but I don't ever see you talk about caring too little.

can that be because a lot of you are totally, and intentionally oblivious to the spiritual basics of existence in this octave to the point of worshipping green ray as if it was everything ? just like it is warned against in the material ?

then going about translating a lot of temporary societal biases and preferences to it, making compliance with them 'caring' and noncompliance 'uncaring' ?

which, appallingly, includes lies, and faking ? justified for a 'good cause' of course ...

This leads many of us to conclude that you don't value caring. And thus, are missing a key component of the teachings.

tells someone who has missed the key component that determines the downflow of energy is the blue ray.

in its absence, it is easy to fake everything. even lie to one's oneself, that s/he is caring. even possible to redefine what things are, according to convenience. possible to fool oneself, and then to fool others without even knowing.

in an environment where there isnt honesty, you wont know whether you are truly love or not. you will even fool yourself without even knowing. just like many examples we have encountered in the history of interactions in this forum, ranging from blatant, obvious ones to more subtle examples.


'i care so i should lie' is a DISSERVICE to everyone, everything.

[apeiron]

....key component that determines the downflow of energy is the blue ray

This is indeed important and is in harmony with the concept of higher selves, I think

[Monica]

can that be because a lot of you are totally, and intentionally oblivious to the spiritual basics of existence in this octave to the point of worshipping green ray as if it was everything ? just like it is warned against in the material ?

See what I mean? You just confirmed what I just said. Once again you show that you are so concerned about having too much green, that you dismiss the green. You continually talk about the dangers of being 'too loving' but seem to miss the dangers of not being loving enough.

'i care so i should lie' is a DISSERVICE to everyone, everything.

You still don't get it. You seem to think in terms of black-and-white, either lying or not lying.

And you don't show any indication for valuing caring at all. How about some balance here? Tell what happens when there isn't enough green.

[apeiron]

Unity, I'm not going to reply to your last post. I'm done going point-by-point and would just be repeating myself. For now I will just reiterate that I disagree with your overall interpretations of the the main principles of the Law of One. It would be a daunting task to provide enough quotes to 'prove' this to you, and even then, it probably wouldn't work anyway. If you don't 'get' it then nothing I could say will ever change that for you.

You seem to have missed the point. It's not about my mother. I've already acknowledged that she wasn't very developed so of course, now I understand why she was the way she was. What you're missing is that this is just an example to illustrate caring or non-caring. The point is about the concept of caring itself, not about where my mother was in her development.

The bottom line is that you don't seem to ever talk about caring for others. You seem to downplay and even negate it, every chance you get. You talk about caring too much, to the point of self-sacrifice, as undesirable, but I don't ever see you talk about caring too little.

This leads many of us to conclude that you don't value caring. And thus, are missing a key component of the teachings.

---

This quote is also important:

42.8 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotional 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 in so far 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 reaction 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.

This possibly occurs due to the influence of green ray.

Good find. This seems to indicate that caring for others trumps expression. This supports my assertion that caring for others is more important than 'honest expression.'

Honest expression becomes moot if the caring isn't there.

Still seems that one should use the imagination in order not to repress the emotion? Even though the action was suppressed indeed.

--------------------

Is Ra talking about only emotions?

What about actions?

[unity100]

can that be because a lot of you are totally, and intentionally oblivious to the spiritual basics of existence in this octave to the point of worshipping green ray as if it was everything ? just like it is warned against in the material ?

See what I mean? You just confirmed what I just said. Once again you show that you are so concerned about having too much green, that you dismiss the green. You continually talk about the dangers of being 'too loving' but seem to miss the dangers of not being loving enough.

thats what you see here in this environment. what people who are faking their feelings need is not 'love'. 'love' doesnt fix any kind of blockage/distortion, as Ra tells us. blue, does.

as much as it may be distasteful to many, blue, is a color and vibration that is ABOVE the spectrum/color that is green, and closer to source than green is.

let me reiterate - blue is higher in vibration.

'i care so i should lie' is a DISSERVICE to everyone, everything.

You still don't get it. You seem to think in terms of black-and-white, either lying or not lying.
And you don't show any indication for valuing caring at all. How about some balance here? Tell what happens when there isn't enough green.

that situation, is unfortunately out of the experience spectrum of many here, as easily understandable from the nature of discussions and the interactions that have progressed so far. to do that, i would have to first describe settings, environments, and people to the extent of picturing an entirely different subset of society, and then move on to proceed explaining and examining more delicate distortions. due to lack of common ground for explaining these, i dont have the desire to expend the effort needed to do this, to discuss with a lot of people who apparently not only do not need, but also, as it seems, do not want anything to do with these experience spectrum at this point in their lives.