Play, pleasure in the law of one

Lately I’ve been thinking about pleasure and joy. What are these concepts pointing to?

I stumbled upon this quote today, which actually happens to be one of my favorites in the conversation, but this time, I was drawn towards a section of it that I wasn’t before (in bold):

19.17 Questioner: Can you tell me what bias creates their momentum toward the chosen path of service to self?

Ra: I am Ra. We can speak only in metaphor. Some love the light. Some love the darkness. It is a matter of the unique and infinitely various Creator choosing and playing among its experiences as a child upon a picnic. Some enjoy the picnic and find the sun beautiful, the food delicious, the games refreshing, and glow with the joy of creation. Some find the night delicious, their picnic being pain, difficulty, sufferings of others, and the examination of the perversities of nature. These enjoy a different picnic.

All these experiences are available. It is free will of each entity which chooses the form of play, the form of pleasure.

Those last eight words stick out to me, because it seems like Ra is pointing to, at least, a certain correspondence between these two concepts (play and pleasure)

I’d love to hear some of y’all’s thoughts on the relationship between play and pleasure, beyond, yknow, “when one plays, they feel pleasure”.

Honestly most of my thoughts have been surrounding joy, pleasure, and how illusory they are. There is a certain darkness to these concepts when you are playing around with them unconsciously. Sort of reminds me of the Matrix of Spirit tarot card (The Devil.) That’s where my thoughts have been, so it’s interesting to me that play also seems to be at the crux of these concepts of joy and pleasure.

Anyways, I’ll leave it at that. Love to hear your thoughts, thanks

2 Likes

I think that pleasure-getting is a machanism that could sometimes propel you to go in a certain direction. The Confederation has once said that the service-to-others path is a more joyful and more easy path, which though may not be the best path to serve the Creator(the “best” here means giving the Creator the most unique and variegated experience as possible). So, here is the question. If graduation(i.e. being harvested into the next density) makes you feel extremely much more unhappy but nevertheless takes you a step farther on the evolution path, will you still strive as much to graduate? Another version of this question is: if doing the Creator’s will makes you unhappy, will you still do that? I think to make it make sense(i.e. to make the Creation work), getting closer to the Creator must be(at least in most cases or in terms of the longer run) accompanied with more intense pleasure.

2 Likes

I would say that this would be a sure sign that one is not doing the Creator’s will.

When we are doing what we came here to do, things just flows and we are at ease with ourselves (we could easily call this being happy).

3 Likes

Can you find a quote on this for me? I really don’t remember anything like that ever being suggested in the material. In fact, I have one quote from session 17 wherein Ra says that positive polarization is as difficult as negative polarization, essentially:

17.33 Questioner: Why is the negative path so much more difficult a path to attain harvestability upon than the positive?

Ra: I am Ra. This is due to a distortion of the Law of One which indicates that the gateway to intelligent infinity be a gateway at the end of a strait and narrow path as you may call it. To attain fifty-one percent dedication to the welfare of other-selves is as difficult as attaining a grade of five percent dedication to other-selves. The, shall we say, sinkhole of indifference is between those two.

I was writing the post based completely on my past memories of things that I may have only skimmed through once. But luckily my memories haven’t got distorted and after some efforts I found my targeted paragraph.

https://www.llresearch.org/channeling/1988/0918#!0

We feel that the true selfishness is to choose the path of service to others, and we are not playing with words here. We have found it to be the quicker path, the easier path, and by far the more joyful path. We find the increasing lack of competition to be most satisfying, and the ability ultimately to merge together as one creative, collaborative being infinitely gratifying.

Maybe Q’uo here is speaking from a subjective perspective whereas Ra’s perspective has become objective enough to be not tainted with so much of subjective opinions.

What’s more, I think IN ORDER TO make EVERYONE available to the choosing of the path back to the Creator, it has to be something EVERYONE is able to do. And I think the negative path demands intense competition and demands using large amount of intellect and is obviously not a path that everyone can embark on without effort. And I firmly believe that the Creator will not leave even a single one behind, every one, no matter how silly, degenerative, hopeless, weak you think you are, you are as able as everyone else to embark on the service-to-others path(which service does not necessarily mean a doing-service, as long as your intention is being-for-others, you are servicing, and setting intention is one thing that every one can do). And I further think that the notion of leaving not a single one behind may perhaps be the reason why the Creator intends meditation and dream to be useful tools in third density(which is not a density of understanding), because meditating and dreaming(and interpretating it) are things that everyone is able to do and could engage in without too much efforts demanded. The core behind the intentionality is leaving no one behind.

1 Like

I think we may have some disagreements on what part of the selfhood is happy here. One example is Jesus’ crying out “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me”? on the cross before crucifixion. And the following channeling may also be relevant here:

Yes. One further question. When Christ was crucified, he made the statement, “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” To whom did he speak and what did he mean by this?

I am Latwii, and am aware of your query, my brother. The one known as Jesus the Christ was a mortal, as are all who walk your planet, yet this mortal was the one Creator which had uncovered levels of its being that few upon your planet have approached. As its life pattern reflected more and more that indwelling power and beingness of the one Creator, the path laid out for this entity became clear to it, and this entity then followed that path with great dedication. The path ended in this incarnation for this entity upon that cross, and it spoke as a mortal those words asking the one Creator why it needed to fulfill that destiny, shall we say. For even unto this entity who had realized much of its beingness there remained a mystery as to why the story needed an ending of such a nature that would require it to be nailed to a piece of wood to hang upon and be mocked by many as it gasped its last breaths in physical pain. Yet this entity was lifted up by its own faith in that one Creator which it had found within its being and had attempted to reveal to those who had eyes to see and ears to hear.

1 Like

We could argue that indeed Jesus was no longer doing what he came to do at that time in his incarnation.

Ra did mention that Jesus had stopped balancing compassion with wisdom when he undertook that particular fork on his path.

5 Likes

About pleasure, and joy, I am just wondering…Let’s take the path of service to others as example. Could it be that at first the entity derives pleasure from having been of service in a light manner, but then, if service to others has implied deep concentration and depths of generosity, depths of compassion, might this then imply that he entity derives then more than pleasure and drifted into joy ?

And it would then link to the fact that what you do for others, you, in the end, do for. yourself. So it is not really about selfishness but really, somehow, at least for third density, self healing.

Just a thought…

4 Likes

The experience of pleasure and joy is also a predesigned “experiences” for the infinite creator.

It must first exist for us to experience it, or at least “thought of” first.

Imagine children on the playground developing rules and ways to play a game.
Each rule of the game sets a challenge and creates an experience for the child to experience.

Thus, pleasure and joy are also creation in the matrix of the mind.

When we experience the emotions through the creation,

We recognize the creator,

4 Likes

I agree with your thought that Ra is communicating a correspondence between play and pleasure in those words.

When attempting to grasp the meaning of existence through The Law of One, the expression of free will is the paramount element, so we must remember that play and pleasure must stem from that root. Ultimately, something pushes each of us to express our free will in an polarized or unpolarized manner. In the context of the Law of One, we see this thought reflected in the concept of desire.

Ra speaks a few times on desire which appear relevant:

The proper role of the entity is, in this density, to experience all things desired, to then analyze, understand, and accept these experiences, distilling from them the love/light within them. 18.5

…[the Veil] offers an opportunity for a desire to grow within the mind complex. 86.18

In the magical personality desire, will, and polarity are the keys. 73.11

That being said, Ra did not directly comment on the nature of desire, at least to my knowledge. The consciously-channeled sources more directly addressed desire, which I briefly explored in a previous post. In essence, whereas will causes doing, desire causes the origination of what we do. With Ra’s insightful quote on the magical personality, will and desire appear to be complementary elements. (If someone here is aware of how desire and will emerge from the archetypal mind, sharing such knowledge would be most appreciated.)

With this initial ground established, let us now broach how will and desire drives play and pleasure. As you helpfully point out, when one plays, one experiences pleasure. However, is that statement always true? Can one feel pleasure without play? Furthermore, can one play without feeling pleasure?

The first question—if pleasure may be experienced independent of play–is relatively simple to answer. As a simple example, a simple kind word from a stranger may brighten your whole day. You may or may not be at play when this happens; you may be sitting in a coffee shop, walking down the street, riding the subway, or be anywhere else people are. As such, we answer with resounding yes: pleasure may be experienced independent of play.

The answer to the second question–if “pleasureless play” exists–is more interesting. When pursued in its purest form, play does not have at its core a constructive element. Consider children playing catch with a ball in a circle. One may argue that such an activity will improve the children’s motor skills, which may be true. That said, the number of children who play catch are almost certainly not consciously working to improve their motor skills at a specific activity, for one who does then starts to become an athlete. Furthermore, children may be compelled to play catch by instruction from a schoolteacher. Some children may wish to leave and pursue other activities, but the teacher requires them to continue playing catch. These children could not be said to be engaging in play because the participation is forced, the fun element is mandatory. As such, I argue play must include some element of pleasure, and therefore “pleasureless play” cannot exist.

Let us now return back to the previous line of reasoning, attempting looking at how will and desire relate to play and pleasure. In its essential form, play is something we choose to do. To play is, at its core, to express our will. What makes us want to play is an internal desire to experience pleasure. Just as will and desire go hand-in-hand, so do play and pleasure. Will and play each have a masculine quality, whereas desire and pleasure have a counterbalancing feminine quality.

Given that will and desire are explicitly mentioned by Ra as important to the magical personality while play and pleasure are not, I am inclined to adopt the position that play/pleasure are one specific way to express our will/desire in our life, to become the Creator.

2 Likes

@flofrog : so per your point (as I understand it), joy and pleasure are essentially the same, just different in degree? That is to say, joy could be considered to be a more “refined” pleasure?

As always your thoughts are remarkably concise and pleasantly warm. Always a pleasure, miss frog :frog:. Thank you for sharing

@Stephen: Thanks for sharing your thoughts Stephen! I ultimately agree with you that pleasure/play are one specific way to express our will/desires in life.

The first question—if pleasure may be experienced independent of play–is relatively simple to answer. As a simple example, a simple kind word from a stranger may brighten your whole day. You may or may not be at play when this happens; you may be sitting in a coffee shop, walking down the street, riding the subway, or be anywhere else people are. As such, we answer with resounding yes: pleasure may be experienced independent of play.

I do wonder, though, while the person being given the “kind word” isn’t in an active state of play, the person giving the kind word might be in a sense. There seems to be a little more depth here than can be laid out in a “real world” situation, at least to me. Wish I had more to say about that

With Ra’s insightful quote on the magical personality, will and desire appear to be complementary elements. (If someone here is aware of how desire and will emerge from the archetypal mind, sharing such knowledge would be most appreciated.)

As Jayce pointed out, this is going to be the territory of the Matrix of the Mind. I will add the images here for posterity

(The second image was of course used as a reference in the Law of One conversation)

3 Likes

Silly Harold , that was NOT an insight, that was a wondering thought !!! :flushed:

1 Like

thank you for your clarification flo. I see the distinction

1 Like

It’s my fault sillyhiarolfd, I am never quite quite serious !!! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

2 Likes

flo, feel free to not respond, but as an artist, is “play” essential for you? and if so, do you ever experience “play” without a sense pleasure/joy? do you approach play with any amount of “seriousness” whatsoever?

1 Like

harold, you know I never quite thought of play as an artist. I paint mainly out of love and that love is like a huge surge to paint, and paint and paint. So when I was young I had a job on the side to be able to paint. Then I would quit my job to paint till I needed to work again, which I liked, cause I loved to work anyway.

But play and pleasure I am not sure where part of the love and joy I had when I could paint.

Play and pleasure were really for other things.
I think , for me, play is linked to pleasure.
Joy is definitely more linked to paint, and to interactions with other human beings.
I am not sure I ever approach play with any amount of seriousness at all.

All in all, if looking at myself today, I am not sure I tackle anything with seriousness any more.
Even for subjects as draining as current horrific events, I am active on some things that I feel strongly about, but I don’t know , outside having real heart in them, how much seriousness I engage any more, perhaps because I see how meager is my influence now , lol, ?
Or perhaps because I feel our action melts with others’actions as something like pre-SMC.

4 Likes

Yes, and there is a specific angle of viewing pleasure:

80.15 The service-to-self adept will satisfy itself with the shadows and, grasping the light of day, will toss back the head in grim laughter, preferring the darkness.

1 Like

And here joy is nature that exists in intelligent energy:

31.3 in the green-ray activated being there is the potential for a direct and simple analog of what you may call joy, the spiritual or metaphysical nature which exists in intelligent energy. This is a great aid to comprehension of a truer nature of beingness.

2 Likes

Thank you Oleskii! You’ve got a good nose for quotes I see

80.15 The service-to-self adept will satisfy itself with the shadows and, grasping the light of day, will toss back the head in grim laughter, preferring the darkness.

Laughter, joy. I see a connection.

The one part that sort of puzzles me is the “grasping the light of day” part. What does Ra mean by “grasping”? Hm.

31.3 in the green-ray activated being there is the potential for a direct and simple analog of what you may call joy, the spiritual or metaphysical nature which exists in intelligent energy . This is a great aid to comprehension of a truer nature of beingness.

So… this seems to imply that “joy” is simply the nature of Spirit. Interesting. Thoughts?

Thanks again my friend

2 Likes

Hello Harold (not able to add “silly” before your name :slight_smile: )

Thank you for your post. Let me show my understanding of it, but it’s my own opinion. There are tons of “funny” videos in the internet where something happens to someone. For example, some builder builds a wall with bricks and suddenly all those bricks are falling on him. If knowing the whole story, it might not be so funny already. Probably that’s a person from a pour country with no job, he found the job and was told do so otherwise he will be fired. But he has to feed his family so he’s doing it. Now after the fall MRI showed he will hardly go and his children will not have what to eat. And I have a question: what is causing the laugh? Shall a loving person be laughing on a trauma of another one, who is not even an animal but a human? My answer is that is this moment one can feel how clever or lucky he is, he has knowledge (=light) and that’s why he is not doing it (building falling wall). And the man from the pour country is not smart enough, and it’s ridiculous. So when seeing the light inside one denies and prefers to stay in dark. Because really loving person will feel pain when seeing pain of another one.

42.7 To a mind/body/spirit complex which is starving, the appropriate response is the feeding of the body. You may extrapolate from this.

So these both joy and tossing back the head in grim laughter are opposite to me. First one is the feeling of love (=original thought), second one is enjoying the darkness.

Peter Gabriel sings about stepping on a negative path. In the beginning of video it’s as Ra described the forming of life.

78.29 You may see the air and fire of that which is chaos as literally illuminating and forming the formless, for earth and water were, in the timeless state, unformed. As the active principles of fire and air blow and burn incandescently about that which nurtures that which is to come, the water learns to become sea, lake, and river offering the opportunity for viable life. The earth learns to be shaped, thus offering the opportunity for viable life.

After living in love he chose his path saying he’s smarter than others.

85.11 They experience that which they wish by free choice, being of the earnest opinion that green-ray energy is folly.

He has to make an effort upon himself. He chose another big God and “front door”. He has to say things that are not true. He has to underfoot life into the concrete for his goal. And logically it ends with war.

I’m on my way, I’m making it

The place where I come from
is a small town
They think so small
they use small words
but not me, I’m smarter than that
I worked it out
I’ll be stretching my mouth
to let those big words come right out.

And I will pray to a big God
as I kneel in the big church

And my heaven will be a big heaven
and I will walk through the front door

You said that the “joy” is the nature of Spirit. I feel it also, but cannot check it logically. It’s interesting to find out what’s it.

Have a nice day. :slight_smile:

3 Likes