That would be a weakness, yes. I tend to see the demiurgic forces as well organized, but if specific archons get too into their “roles”, they might start to compete, as is their nature. Hedonism vs Asceticism, for example. The pursuit of shallow bullshit and misconceptions to fill the void of unfulfilled desires, vs the idea that fulfilling desires is wrong and denying oneself fulfillment. Two archontic extremes. From my standpoint, they seem to work well together, but ignorant adherents, mostly humans I guess, can feel like they are competing by promoting such seemingly contrasting principles without knowing they are two sides to the same control system.
And yes, consciousness naturally “evolves”. We are perfect to “begin with”, beyond linear time. The experiences of linear time and “evolution/progress” are natural. No need to rush/race/force it.
That is interesting. I have dealt with more mental, emotional, and existential trauma than most people would be comfortable imagining, and I’m still standing from what may be able to cause others to terminate their incarnations or wind up in a mental asylum. I’m still standing, but I feel rather dead inside, and I feel a painful longing for joy.
That being said, I’m not doing “well”. I wouldn’t consider myself crystalized. I wouldn’t consider myself able to handle such catalyst without being strongly affected.
I wonder, is it possible to be so strong and not affected by negative feelings yet be able to feel truly happy? Can one be somewhat immune to sorrow and still fully experience joy?
What is stronger, more beautiful? The perception/experience of one who is easily hurt by harsh catalyst finally getting what they desire and being so grateful and happy, or that of one who is “crystalized”, not really caring much whether or not they get what they want? I honestly don’t know. I can only try to theorize and maybe understand.
In my opinion, the best one can hope for is to be able to quickly get back to being joyful when catalysts pushes you away from that state.
The better one gets at this, the faster this process goes and the less time is spent away from being joyful.
Up to a point where the transition is just a flash that only the one experiencing it is aware of.
To all external observers, it is like the person is not affected at all.
We can see when Sadhguru gets angry, it lasts only the time that anger can serve him properly in the moment and right after he is back to being at peace.
As Ra said, the goal is not to remain unaffected by negative feelings, but to become unaffected by negative feelings. When this is reached, there is not even a flash of transition, there is true peace (not sure this is even possible while in veiled 3d).
I understand that. I do not know if it’s possible to “cure” all in this life. And if someone has experience opposite to another one, even if he understands another one completely, it’s your experience and it formed your view.
I might not agree with doing well. To my opinion the criterion is to be alive. Alive means well.
Ra didn’t say anything about limits of the crystallized being, and that’s a question for me. To my opinion there’s always the limit and I don’t know if there is any criterion for it.
I don’t think it is the place one can be fully happy because we are not for that here. It’s honour/duty to be.
It’s not possible to solve issue on the same level, it can be solved only from the upper level. We have many things given to help to understand the issues from above. There are parents and children, and it makes clear what issue Logos has. How to make the significator to be what it is not? How to grow child letting him to do whatever he wants and at the same time explaining not to put fingers into the wall socket? The idea itself is already controversial but somehow it should be archived. And Logos shows us it can be archived by force or by love, and Logos chooses love and proposes us to choose the same. How to make fed, clothed, and protected entity stopping to repeat habitually the third-density cycles many times over? By presenting the issue Logos can explain it better to (sub-)sub-Logoi. So Logos posited creating illusion explaining it. I believe Logos has limits of his timeless time so Logos cannot afford totally infinite cycle of joy. And the reason is that Creator came to learn from himself so if the process is not moving that does not help. So from the point of view of Creator claims to himself look ridiculous.
I think this is what to be passed. Just accept it. From my point of view I see both sides of the picnic, but choose the beautiful one without tossing back the head in grim laughter.
I have been saying for a long time that the philosophy of the Law of One - for a normal person with a healthy ego and a socialized personality is perceived terribly. This philosophy is not about the ego (atom), but about the Creator (field). Self-awareness leads to choice. And yes, no matter how cynical it may sound - but this is Lila, a Game. David and Solomon also discussed this topic…You just need to read their philosophical and poetic creativity in the original…
Every part of creation is part of the whole. If you start calling one aspect of creation a “game”, then how can you believe that anything is sacred and real? It’s either all sacred and real, or it’s all just a stupid game. I’d rather believe that everything is sacred. Nobody else gets to tell me that this one aspect of creation is a “game”, and yet somehow something else is real. It’s all one.
We either conceive that everything is real and sacred, or nothing is. There’s something to be said for a healthy, socialized “ego”, vs anti-social tendencies. I’m weird. I’m a wanderer. I don’t fit in…because of the “normally” accepted amount of anti-social crap.
It’s not because I have less emotional intelligence than average that I am considered odd. It’s because I have more.
Cynicism doesn’t give us joy. It doesn’t lead to higher truths. It’s mechanistic dross that should be properly processed. It is but a steppingstone and contrast point to teach us. Divine love is not cynical. It is not mechanistic. It’s not hierarchical. Divine love does not judge one aspect of the creation as a game and another as real.
I’m sorry to be so blunt. I am not trying to be combative. I just wish to speak my truth. All souls are infinite, and I think there is a cyclical process of returning to source and then coming back again to do a long time of incarnations. Those who are moderately “old” since last time they merged with source can get arrogant and think they know so much. They think hierarchically. This thing is a game, this thing is real. They think their wisdom is so profound, when it is very middling.
Those whose linear journey since last merging with source has been very long think differently. Their wisdom can often be judged as ignorance, since they kind of come “full circle” back to the basics.
I’m not perfect. In my 3d life, I judge some things as more important to my happiness than others. I want this thing so bad. And yes, there is a thing. If I don’t get it, other things don’t fulfill me so much. It’s a simple bias. Yet, that “thing” could be different for everyone. One soul’s priorities are not inferior to another’s. All is equally important to source, and we all have our own priorities about what’s important on an individual level in a given lifetime.
Tend to agree… however I’m the among those who perceived it as a ‘game’.
One can call it “Sacred Game” or “Sacred (Virtually) Real Game”, or any other label, doesn’t really matter.
Yet I agree once one put a label of “X” to everything then everything is “X”, there is no such thing as “Not X” within everything, as it will then become “not everything”.
I prefer to make a distinction between soul (Jiva) and consciousness (Chitta).
Soul is a ‘sheathed’ or ‘bordered’ consciousness, Campbell use the term “Consciousness Unit” to make a distinction towards Consciousness which are/is border less.
Soul is not infinite as the ‘sheathing’ is finite, thus there exist my, your, their soul.
Consciousness is infinite as it is border-less thus there’s no such thing as my, your, their consciousness.
The journey from “source” is the journey of putting on layers of sheathing, #separating. The journey back towards the source is the journey of “letting go” of those multiple layers of sheathing, #unifying.
Pride and arrogance can only exist within separation context, the separation is caused by the ‘sheathing’. Thus as the Jiva/Soul/Consciousness Unit starting to embark on journey back towards the source/consciousness it will also gradually and naturally let go of the sheathing and so thus their expression of pride and arrogance. This is a natural process as it will then start to realize and experience the unity of all things.
As small example: will the right hand bragged to the left hand that it is a ‘better hand’? It will not, because both right and left hand are in the state of unity, although each uniquely do different things.
Putting into Ra/Quo’s depiction, the journey back (unifying) will start between late 5th/early 6th density. Prior to that it is a ‘separation game’.
My experience is that life can be sacred and real or a game or any variation you can imagine - it’s all based on your perspective at the time. The sum total of your current mental, emotional, physical and spiritual bodies creates the lense through which you experience reality, which is what I would refer to as perspective. So as our own various state change so does our experience of reality. I have fully believed this planet to be hell incarnate at times and at other times I’ve marveled at the Garden of Eden this planet can be. There have been times I’ve felt everything was supremely sacred and times when I’ve felt nothing really matters and that life is just a giagantic cosmic joke.
I can’t help to share this, a masterpiece from Monty Python…
Turning something perceived to be sad, brutal, disgusting or sacred (to some people) into a gigantic joke with positive tone.
It’s a balance. Heaviness and intensity can, on the flip side be passion, which is really good. Lightness and detachment can, on the flip side, be nihilism, which is really bad. I’ve sunken so far into heaviness that I feel very burnt out. It’s like the quotes I partially remember about weariness of a spiritual nature. It’s hard for me to feel positive emotions, passion, purpose, and that I’m loved.
I’m kind of just trying to rest and recover, but it’s so slow. I’ve had a major lack of existential fulfillment throughout my life, and recently got out of a fake ET cult and had an online relationship end with a covert narcissist I originally met in that cult before we left it who broke my heart. I don’t feel much hope.
I hope what they say is true about the balancing mechanism. Inertial dampening, I guess. If you’ve had it super easy and a lot of joy, a challenge will come up. If it’s been a “half-remembered nightmare”, something extraordinarily good will come. I like that idea. New-age people spew their law of attraction stuff based partially on truth, but it’s privilege and inertia. Those who have had an easy time can easily keep attracting more positivity, and those who have had a doodoo time can easily keep attracting more doodoo. It would not be very fair when someone is stuck in a certain frame of reference and inertia if there didn’t exist such a mechanism.
There’s actually no good or bad, as good exist only when bad exist and vice versa. It all truly dependent on which point of view.
There is a similarity between “nothing” and “everything”, both has no boundary.
The journey back towards the infinite is a journey from “something” to “nothing”, as only by being “nothing”, something can be “everything” (infinite / no boundary).
Thus detachment, lightness is:
“Good” for those whose intention is journeying back to the infinite.
“Bad” for those whose intention is journeying forth from the infinite.
While it’s opposite; attachment, heaviness is:
“Good” for those whose intention is journeying forth from the infinite.
“Bad” for those whose intention is journeying back to the infinite.
Maybe in general. I’m talking about contrasts and extremes, though. If the detachment goes to the extreme of nihilism, I don’t think that’s useful for either journey, forth from or towards the infinite. On the other hand, if the heaviness if purified to passion, I think that’s useful for either journey.
Then one need to define this “extreme nihilism” as among those who advise detachment and define the “return journey to the state of Nirvana (Blown out / nothing)” is Siddhartha.
If “Nihilism” with the attitude of “Do whatever you want to others / environment” or “Love / Empathy Nihilism” then that is actually not “Detachment” but “Attachment”.
Well, the lack of empathy thing is an obvious example. I also refer to when people start saying the material world and basically all experiences, thoughts, emotions, etc. are illusions. The whole reductionism of becoming nothing to become everything. Something about it doesn’t sit right with me. Maybe I have a different way of relating to the all, or maybe I’m on a different part of my path towards eventually reaching that state NATURALLY, not by being poked and prodded and backed into a corner by stuff, which is counterproductive. That’s a weird feeling for its own topic.
I tend to believe that if it exists, it’s part of the all. I don’t think the all would ask us to discard individuality, emotions, thoughts, desires, etc. but to integrate them, to add them to the whole, and they will naturally merge in time without us having to self-annihilate/reduce/discard. 7d is described as accumulating spiritual mass in preparation to join the all, rather than reducing.
