As for battles, this is also interesting:
Perhaps this will explain why an entity saying “do not resist evil” - Jesus - have shown unprecedented progress and is currently in 5th density.
Ra calls it semantic difficulties)
Both the third and fourth density are connected to the earth, and the earth dictates its own rules of the game…
1 Like
Well, the universal laws are immutable throughout densities to my understanding.
The most basic being “as you sow, so you shall reap” or “as you do unto others, so it will be done unto you”…thus, the Law of Cause & Effect, also known as karma.
I meant the principle of manifestation, karma is also connected with this principle. I find Kabbalistic philosophy very interesting in places. Especially the description of the four worlds of manifestation.
I haven’t ventured into Kabbalistic philosophy, I do recall we had some… feathers flying…about it in the meditation thread long ago. 
But that was due to my feeling that the “god” of the Old Testament is very bad juju…that hasn’t changed, and won’t.
Anyhoo, so I did a search for “paradox” on the L/L site today and found this session:
1 Like
If only the Jews could understand that Moses used “promised land” figuratively, and not literally…same as Jesus used “Kingdom of Heaven” figuratively…
Unfortunately, things are difficult with Kabbalah. Perhaps that’s why Don chose Tarot to study the archetypal mind. And Carla refused to study Kabbalah (if I remember correctly). This is my personal opinion and not binding to anything, but I see it so that Don studied the activities and followers of the Golden Dawn. The work of this order is very far from traditional Judaism. Kabbalah refers to different currents of philosophical mystical (occult) thought. The Kabbalistic scheme is the traditional scheme of teaching in the Golden Dawn. That’s what I was interested in. Because if you take the Zohar, Bahir, Sefer Yetzira, without having an idea of the cultural Jewish layer, then it will be difficult to understand these works. Aryeh Kaplan tried to look at the mystical Kabbalah from the inside of the Jewish tradition, but again, it will be difficult for a person outside the cultural layer to understand its constructions. Just as it is difficult to understand outside the cultural layer, for example, the Vedas and Upanishads.
1 Like
I just wanted to ask you something quickly on a slightly unrelated note, about book 4 and the tarot.
This question & answer:
Would you say this is the negativity bias that psychology speaks of?
Because in the book I mentioned above - Buddha’s Mind, the author also discusses the so-called negativity bias.
I think the context of the two differ.
In the context of the Archetype of
Experience of Mind, aka the Emperor,
the bias is about grasping with Authority
some experience, and this has a sense
of nobility because by way of pursuing
experience by desire, evolution occurs.
There seems nobility in experiencing
all things desired - as if a congruence
with some divine intent that pervades
the universe.
Of course there’s the notion of polarity,
i.e. STS and STO where many STS are
drawn to positions of Rule by way of
power and control obsession - however
the way experience gets significance
seems tied to polarized intent. In other
words if engaged in experience with
STO or STS intent, the experience is
agnostic and remains noble. We don’t
necessarily evolve as more STS by
engaging in experiences, the way in
which we transform by experience,
I.e. STS or STO seems more related
to our STO or STS intent legging in.
In the context of the psychological
negativity bias, negativity seems to
connote diminished or degraded
states or interpretation thereof
which is not about negative STS
polarization commonly seen with
malevolent dictators. Note there are
benevolent emperors and dictators
who embody positive STS polarization.
*embody positive STO polarization.
I think Singapore might be an example.
Somehow that nation sustains a high
quality of life for most people even though
some of them may not be happy living
under such a strict system of government.
Ra specifically states that there isn’t grasping (reaching).
With respect, I think you’re misunderstanding the psychological / neuroscientific concept of negativity bias. It has nothing to do with who is positive or who is negative, or how they behave.
It has to do with the “experience of the mind” on an entity. Let me give you an example of negativity bias in psychology. So it’s that time of the year in your company and all employees are getting their annual performance appraisals, and your boss calls you into her office and tells you 23 things that you do absolutely awesome, and one thing where there is room for improvement, and all you can think of is that one thing (not the 23). That’s a simplified example of negativity bias. (the negative made the impression, the positive made little impression - remember the card is called The Experience of the Mind).
As per the wikipedia page:
In my mind, that’s exactly what Ra is talking about.
Which means it was designed by our Logos, as the archetypes are a “blueprint” of our Logo’s design.
I dropped out of the discussion a bit, because of the grounding :). Working in the garden earths well, then it is very difficult to focus on the line of conversation. I’ve read your question twice, but I didn’t fully understand it. My experience says that the nature of the mind is quite specific, it is not always possible to use both its intellectual and intuitive parts at once, usually either one or the other part of the mind works. Negative experience is mostly related to survival, which is what any entity is interested in. Therefore, this experience will be more emotional and lasting. The experience of joy is not so connected with survival, therefore, the effect of such an emotion is shorter.
It can be survival related, but I think it goes further than survival. Take “shame” or “rejection” for example, in a context where it isn’t survival related.
It affects one’s self image negatively, and self-love, self-worth and self-acceptance are all indigo ray work. Or take something like bullying at school.
Remember Ra commented in the material that Carla had some difficulty with self-worth (indigo ray), although it’s naturally universal.
The psychologist Brene Brown has essentially dedicated her entire career to studying shame - which led to her own spiritual awakening.
Carla had difficulties because of her parents. She talked about these moments. She had to get out of this situation through the so-called “substitute object”. Donald Woods Winnicott writes well about such an object. The psyche is a very interesting object to study. One way or another, we (our psyche) will experience influences, both external and internal, and react to these influences. I always say that you should “leave your family” or “go to the mountains” like Milarepa in order to focus on the Creator. Living in a society and constantly experiencing the influence of society, it is very difficult to achieve the necessary consciousness / concentration. This is my personal opinion
This I agree with, however one goes about making “alone time” happen. Joseph Campbell (the famous mythologist) used to advise “having a room” that is “just yours”.
To get back to survival, this was something Alan Watts often touched on. If you say to anything ‘spontaneous’ “you must happen” then you take the joy out of it. This was such a central theme in his teaching actually. If you live in the present, in the now, so-called “survival” falls away, very similar to Jesus saying “take therefore no thought for the morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself”.
And this is of course also Eckhart Tolle’s central teaching.
And our friends of Ra:
If a mystic is one who is aware of her/his inseparability, as an individual, from the total existing universe, then survival becomes superfluous.
Survival from what? You’re it, and it is you. There’s no conflict, no contradiction. You are no longer “facing the world”, you are the world.
If we consider our slightly earlier conversation, then survival is ‘clinging to life’ and ‘grasping’…the opposite of ‘surrender’ and ‘letting go’.
Remember the paradoxes? Give it away, and it comes back. Try and keep it, and you lose it. You must die, to live.
Let’s use an example instead) You have a family that you can’t leave. You have a relationship within this family. For example, you are in a very relaxed and harmonious state, but your mother comes and says, you need to do this and that, and I also want to talk right now about what she is currently worried about. You have to come out of your peaceful and harmonious state and react to the external presence, trying to find the right words and reactions. But something goes wrong and your mom starts to get angry at your words, or at your actions. Your harmonious state is gradually disappearing. And it takes time and effort to finish this contact and get back into the right state. Personally, I need a state of silence and inspiration for my life and work, but I have not yet advanced enough not to react with disharmony to inappropriate external stimuli. No matter how much I know about unity, spirit, meditation, and so on, I cannot remove instinctive unconscious reactions completely. And fully harmoniously contact with their surroundings. I think that neither Jesus nor Milarepa managed to harmoniously contact their surroundings. The first was crucified, and the second did not agree to go to the village to the people and teach them, preferring to teach the people he met, provided they recognize him as a teacher.
1 Like
I am not ready as early Christians to endure stoning or beheading or crucifixion. I am not so strong in spirit yet. And yes, this is clinging to the current life, first of all for the family. I can’t break the connection with my family with one movement of my mind 
Weak.
I do not use the word “death” in these conversations literally. I’m speaking of the mystical “death”.
Jesus’ physical death is a separate matter from his metaphysical “death”.
Aldous Huxley has done a good job elucidating this in his book The Perennial Philosophy.
I also don’t use the words “clinging to life” literally. So rest assured, no-one is advocating any martyrdom of any kind.
I was sensing we’re not having the same conversation…