The Discipline of the Personality: Control vs. Will

[Jeremy Weiland]

from tloo, session 52:

"questioner: am i correct, then, in assuming that
discipline of the personality, knowledge of self, and
control in strengthening of the will would be what any
fifth-density entity would see as those things of
importance?

ra: i am ra. in actuality these things are of
importance in third through early seventh densities.
the only correction in nuance that we would make is
your use of the word, control. it is paramount that it
be understood that it is not desirable or helpful to
the growth of the understanding, may we say, of an
entity by itself to control thought processes or
impulses except where they may result in actions not
consonant with the law of one. control may seem to be
a short-cut to discipline, peace, and illumination.
however, this very control potentiates and
necessitates the further incarnative experience in
order to balance this control or repression of that
self which is perfect.

instead, we appreciate and recommend the use of your
second verb in regard to the use of the will.
acceptance of self, forgiveness of self, and the
direction of the will; this is the path towards the
disciplined personality. your faculty of will is that
which is powerful within you as co-creator. you cannot
ascribe to this faculty too much importance. thus it
must be carefully used and directed in
service-to-others for those upon the positively
oriented path.

there is great danger in the use of the will as the
personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even
subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the
entity."

************************************************** ****

question: what is the difference between the use of
control and the use of will in the evolution of an
entity, specifically as they relate to the discipline
of the personality?

i would be interested in any of your thoughts, as i
have just started to consider this question.

btw, to whom it may concern, this would make an
excellent q'uo topic... <nudge, nudge>

:-)

love and light,

jeremy

__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
free pop-up blocker - get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

[Trevor Traub]

jeremy weiland <greenlantern113@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=taqzmjahnqb55hquwgsdfx7ykp6i_sfgfxiyo7 pxjb6iw8vwnteyc19vwq8ax9yh2yxfehk2qelsh7abaipu11k)> wrote: question: what is the
difference between the use of
control and the use of will in the evolution of an
entity, specifically as they relate to the discipline
of the personality?

i would be interested in any of your thoughts, as i
have just started to consider this question


<me>hello group, jeremy great question,

to me, the major difference is that when one is controlling something/one the
may be operating at their will but they have gone the extra step in service to
self to make their will paramount above other circumstances. to me control
suggests changing something because of what it is and not accepting its true
nature, pure catalyst. this, i believe often hinders the evolution of an entity
especially in the aspect of discipline.

it seems, at least for me, that will is not always realized as it is intended
when it is our own, or at least not right away. this in it self produces
additional catalyst that is quite vavaluable towards patience and acceptance.
therefore retaining a knowledge of the will while at the same time willing to
sacrifice the personal will for the greater utilization of catalyst for
discipline. this can bring additional catalyst if the entity believes it is the
cause of the will not being realized, but it is good to keep in mind that
everything happens for a precise and specific reason and to learn form every
situation. this mind set aids me in this type of self inflicted catalyst which
in turn aids in the original will of discipline, rerealized with a much stronger
base for the mind set of discipline.

i think that discipline is a controling word to being with, and i belive that it
is limiting to an entities experince if implamented with out caution.
moderation is a healthy discipline that works for me and does require alot of
will. and if enough will is concentrated enough than the sub-consious intentions
of the entity will molded as such.

it is important to remember that it is not the catalyst that is important to the
entities evolution but the effects and what the entity chooses to do with that
catalyst, that is of prime importance.

love and light to all

trevor




---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
free pop-up blocker - get it now

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[congahead2000]

man, this is some fine tuning here. i don't post very often, but this
is a goodie! i'll try my best to speak from experience rather than
philosophy. when i've been tuning into the silence regularly ( hey, a
discipline issue!) i don't have to "try" and be in a open, loving
place. that happens because of the connection. the perspective of "
not my will but thy will" or "all catalist is good- ie something to
learn here " also falls into place- the strength or intensity of that
knowing is completly related to the strength of the internal
connection. so to me, the only effective discipline or active aiming
of the will is at trying to establish and maintain the internal
connection with the center, silence or oneness- however i feel
enabled to do this.
here in 3d it is a tough call, as our "connection" is always
tainted in some way. at least mine is, and i've been working at it
for at least 35 years ( this time around..).
and as i work over time, i experience the ebbs and flows of "ease"
or "difficulty" in not only making that connection, but in the
motivation to make the connection. all this is self- learning -
understanding one's "internal landscape" and shaping the desire (
will) for the changes in personality that bring one more intune with
the oneness.
once again - good thread! rob the lurker

[amilius2001]

jeremy and gang, i believe the answer is to be found in the
reading itself although in a distorted context, ra and quo both
being fond of distortion as an analysis of what occurs for a
purpose within our context of reality. i have for some time now
appreciated the idea that our reality within chosen limitations is
something like a roller coaster ride for the soul. we have a great
yet limited influence on events. think in terms of the question
being posed to each of us by the universe in each and every
moment, " will i appreciate what i have called into my experience
in the present moment?" the choice of free will is then whether
to regard and appreciate chosen circumstances, or not. will
becomes the choice to regard circumstances from a perspective
that facilitates appreciative intent based on the current moment.
control is the choice of intent without regard to the current
moment. that the two frequently produce the same result
obscures the importance of regard in the appreciation of
circumstances with intent. the highest, clearest, and grandest
form of regard, appreciation, and intent is, in all three cases,
love. the sharpest contrast between will and control is readily
seen when love is absent from choices made and from purpose
as well. this is all in the material you quoted from the
perspective of 'purpose demonstrated as a product of will or
control' rather than as 'purpose observed as consciousness of
intent demonstrated by the use of will or control.' in short, will is
applied with regard to circumstances and control in spite of
them. which sounds more appreciative to you? which of these
sounds more appreciative: willfully shaping personality or
controlled discipline of personality? i once asked in meditation,
" how is it that pre-destination and free will both seem to exist?
in what context are they not mutually exclusive?" i 'heard' this
answer quite clearly from within, " the only thing predestined by
the universe is absolute joy. you all have the free will to avoid
it." love is all there is. amilius

[Paul Kandrah]

> there is great danger in the use of the will as the
> personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even
> subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the
> entity."
>
> ************************************************** ****
>
> question: what is the difference between the use of
> control and the use of will in the evolution of an
> entity, specifically as they relate to the discipline
> of the personality?
>
> jeremy


what does it mean?

"a mind not to be changed by place or time, the mind
is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of
hell, a hell of heaven."
--- john milton

"a rock thrown in the air. it loses nothing by coming
down, gained nothing by going up."
--- marcus aurelius

"if i am level with the lowest, i am nothing; and if i did not know
for a certainty that the craziest sot in the village is my equal,
and were not pround to have him walk with me as my friend, i would
not write another word -- for this is my strength."
--- edward carpenter

"we are all functioning at a small fraction of our capacity to live
fully in its total meaning of loving, caring, creating and
adventuring. consequently, the actualizing of our potential can
become the most exciting adventure of our lifetime."
--- herbert otto

what is meaning?

[Seek Up]

>jw: question: what is the difference between the use of
>control and the use of will in the evolution of an
>entity, specifically as they relate to the discipline
>of the personality?

what?s up jw/asc2k,



i was movin along, minding my own business when jeremy triggered the brain -
undisciplined in posting - and all the thoughts came rushing to the forefront
and i found myself going off my own deep end, making the q?uo blitz into this
discussion group, again.. i don?t pretend to say one new word that hasn?t been
shared or thought on this list. i don?t write thinking that i?m going to tell
everyone the way things are. no, the project compelled me and with the
motivation, i had such fun doing it. i see it as an essay of what little
personal understanding i have on this subject at this present moment. so many
thoughts to share, hoping to glue it all together into coherency. here?s we go.
please forgive me for it?s largeness. (caps for emphasis, not for extra volume
in speech.) thanks for those who?ve already contributed, to this topic
especially.



first, i?d like to make note of something ra calls the inner light. where the
will comes from, ya might say.



?questioner: then will you speak of the difference between the spiraling light
that enters through the feet and the light invoked through the crown chakra?



ra: i am ra. the action of the upward spiraling light drawn by the will to meet
the inner light of the one infinite creator may be likened to the beating of the
heart and the movement of the muscles surrounding the lungs and all the other
functions of the parasympathetic nervous system. the calling of the adept may be
likened to those nerve and muscle actions over which the mind/body/spirit
complex has conscious control.



questioner: you mentioned in an earlier session that the experiential catalyst
was first experienced by the south pole and appraised with respect to its
survival value. that?s why i asked the question. would you expand on this
concept?



ra: i am ra. we have addressed the filtering process by which in-coming energies
are pulled upwards according to the distortions of each energy center and the
strength of will or desire emanating from the **awareness of inner light**. if
we may be more specific, please query with specificity.?



glb: specifically and unambiguously stated, the desire to pull upwards the
?in-coming energies? (all of life?s experiences) to be transmuted by the higher
centers of understanding is a desire which ?emanates from the awareness of inner
light?. what in ra?s words is the inner light?



?questioner: can you describe the energy that enters these energy centers? can
you describe its path from its origin, its form, and its effect? i don?t know if
this is possible.



ra: the origin of all energy is the action of free will upon love. the nature of
all energy is light. the means of its ingress into the mind/body/spirit complex
is duple.

firstly, there is the inner light which is polaris of the self, the guiding
star. this is the birthright and true nature of all entities. this energy dwells
within.



ra: i am ra. consider the polarity of mind/body/spirit complexes. the inner
light is that which is your heart of being. its strength equals your strength of
will to seek the light?.?



q?uo: ?this intention, this will to seek the truth of the creator, is your
strength, your heart and the motivating factor of that which will occur to you.?





glb: the heart of being is your strength of will to seek the light. we are will.
we are that strength to seek the light, which is ultimately the seeking of
ourselves. before the distortions of love and light, we were and are that primal
spark to choose how we may know ourselves and serve. when speaking of this type
of will it may be easier to understand it with the label of ?true will?; thus
making the distinction between the will that is indeed exercised, but exercised
only in bowing to the fears within or to the fears of others, and the will that
co-creates.



from the book ?wheels of life?, more on true will (which is where i got the
concept : )



?true will requires a deep communication with the self (ra: awareness of inner
light), a confidence and trust in your own volition, and the ability to risk the
consequences of your own actions.



the latter is the cause of many people?s retreat from the third chakra. power
implies responsibility. victims need not be responsible ? it?s someone else?s
fault. if we dare go against the grain ? if we exercise our true will, then we
stand out and take upon ourselves the consequences of our actions. it?s scary
stuff. but it is through this that a stronger sense of self is born, and through
that strength the will is developed. like a muscle, we cannot strengthen our
will without exercising it.



if there are consequences, these too are part of our path. aleister crowley also
states: ?a man who is doing his true will has the inertia of the universe to
assist him.? and that ?man can only attract and employ the forces for which he
is really fitted.?



crowley feels that true will arises from our basic harmony with what is around
us and can therefore never be out of harmony. by integrating and accepting all
the composite parts of ourselves that create our desires and needs, their
fulfillment is the result of a natural cleavage. yet will and wishes are not
synonymous, for the true will extends beyond the ego-self (ra: awareness of
inner light) and embraces a higher purpose. it is only by attunement that this
purpose can be detected. therefore, we need not fear the consequences of our
true will, but can embrace them for the lessons that they hold.?



glb: so where does control, contact with this authentic self, the will that this
self weilds, and discipline all intersect? i don?t know, i am asking as much as
i am telling. i believe it takes the disciplined will to move through the daily
life and breach those thresholds that had previously barred the mind that wasn?t
ready for deeper inititation into intelligent infinity. it is a will that is
used to trust and open the self to the true self within, which has the greatest
of wills.



q?uo: ?this seeking is a matter of marshaling one?s own will and focusing in a
disciplined matter upon the seeking for truth, upon the finding of light.
however, within this complex of seeking, there is no outward manifestation
promised, no fruits must be born from such seeking. this is seeking
unmanifested.?



like all things, the first self faced and reacted to, the place where all things
begin is with the self. ra says somewhere that the first acceptance is of self,
the first separation is with the self. therefore, by extension, the first
control is the controlling of the self.



a positive polarizing entity is not consciously seeking to control others
(though he may find as his processes are rendered more transparent that that is
occurring)? but may control the self for reasons of protection, defense,
positioning oneself for the greatest amount of love or other need or advantage?
and a host of others?



for example: a sensitive guy hears inconsiderate words in a social situation. he
wants to cry. the act of crying would not at all be unconsonant with the law of
one, so it is an emotion which need not be suppressed or controlled and which
can be spontaneously carried out, ensuring the best in evolution both for he and
the other-selves involved?. however, there may be a number of mental distortions
which cause him to control the tears and not cry? perhaps he may have false
notions of what masculine means? or he may worried about what others might
think? or he may fear losing his perceived social power in that circle, losing
the image he hopes to maintain for what he perceives women expect from a man ?
or there may be some other advantage to gain if he held the tears in that moment
and shed them at a later time.



whatever the cause, the choice is control; to bury the tears and the feeling
that brought them to the eyes. an act which is depolarizing because it
necessitates and potentiates further balancing? he was not vulnerable to the
catalyst enough to feel and process it. he instead, controlled the first
reaction of the m/b/s ? which was to cry- choosing not to learn from it by
allowing it to move through in acceptance, but rather, choosing to process an
illusion plastered over the emotion his soul gave him. which will not
permanently halt his evolution, but will slow the progress down if the original
catalyst is not honored, respected, and accepted. acceptance is allowing it to
be, as i?ve heard many say on this list. there is of course nothing wrong with
not knowing how to honor a catalyst that our fears tell us to control? we are
designed, by virtue of third density, to not know how to greet catalyst and
thereby miss the mark a million and one times before we get to a point of
understanding. efficient use of catalyst is, as ra says, rare?.



if he wanted to discipline the personality, he would not recognize mistake in
this situation, but recognize yet another opportunity to follow ra?s guidelines.
which states that before the strengthening of the will (which, as rob said, is
an activity dependent upon that contact with silence), there first needs be a
sincere and honest attempt to accept and forgive the self and the self?s
feelings in the moment. what is cool is that, as you forgive and accept, you are
applying will? in the right direction?. as you try to accept and forgive and
learn *how to*, you are learning the process and the heart of seeking itself,
you are becoming disciplined. when the life you?ve known pulls your attention
away from that conscious effort to accept and forgive, it takes great
persistence (bulking up the muscles of will), great remembrance, and great
discipline to embrace instead of reject, to open the heart instead of lash out
in anger, to allow instead of block, and to love instead of fear.



and as you know, because we are one, what you do to yourself, you to unto
others? and vice versa? that self that you are working to love within your own
skin will inevitably expand to include all other selves so that the inner work
that you do is all done in order to serve. you treat yourself in a manner
disciplined to find the love in the moment, you will naturally find that same
discipline in consciously seeing that love in others. developing the habits of
discipline for whatever ends you will use it for, will install new programs of
seeking in you which will, after much repetition, unconsciously greet the moment
for you, so to speak. almost as if you find yourself looking for love within the
moment, without having tried to look for love, the discipline unconsciously
kicks in because of the repetition of habit.



by using the will we have been guided to use - the one not attached to outcome,
the one that ends in surrender and trusts that everything is exactly as it
should be, the one that knows, or trys to, that every step is taken in utter
perfection and the creator?s got it all in good hands ? we are moving closer to
living in harmony with that inner light. a light not obvious to the ordinary man
but one which takes the drive and the discipline in order that we might make
good enough use of our catalyst and uncover its hidden treasures of identity.
using that will not to control but to ask, you are trusting that the work of
forgiving and accepting will lead you to a self within that knows what to do,
what it wants, and who it is or, who you are?



wheels of life: ?true will reflects an integration of the whole and an emanation
from the depths of self. (ra says: emanating from the awareness of the inner
light.) there is also the concept of cosmic will ? that the universe has its own
desires for us, and we have but to perceive them in order to know exactly what
to do, and fall into a place of natural order and harmony. this is a sense of a
higher, more intelligent will.?



glb: that taking on of the disciplined life is done in fire and pain to me, the
greatest aspect of discipline is the quality of coming back to the attempt, not
the success, but the attempt to love and forgive the self, to ask of that self
who it is and what it needs so that, as the fire burns, what is personality in
the equation falls away as discovery of what was always there, deepens. like the
monkey mind in meditation, every distraction in life hopes to pull you away from
that conscious focus of accepting and forgiving. it won?t always be the bills,
the family, the horizontal life that pulls? but various transient, comfort
seeking, and fear-based desires within that will lead you down a road that
perpetuates every energy but acceptance and forgiveness.



as the mind in meditation pulls you away so that you don?t even realize that you
have lost sight of the breath because you have once again, immersed yourself in
and become your thoughts; in the same respect, the aimless self will pull your
will away to be used for less noble pursuits and you don?t realize that your
discipline has been dissipated and your focus taken away because you have
energized and become the unconscious fears and mental configurations that you
were with discipline before, seeking to face, accept, forgive, and love. it
takes persistent persistence to return and return and return and return, and
return again to the job of seeking you told yourself you were committed to. that
job of attempting to learn how to forgive and accept the past, and all incoming
catalyst, in order to heal, become whole, and serve.



those portions of the unintegrated self not loved, accepted, and forgiven ? ie,
understood ? will borrow the power of the self and use that will for their own
desires, (which probably won?t be the most sto oriented.) as ra said, it might
be a dangerous business because as the light grows nearer, the dark can get
darker and if that darkness hasn?t been faced and loved, step by step, and if
the seeker reaches too far ahead without enough self-knowledge and without faith
that everything is at is should be in the present moment, those pockets of
darkness within may harness that will for their own ends.



it takes the daily discipline to detach from these portions of self in order to
create that space between where the self does not become the distortions, but
honors them, faces them, and seeks to learn from them by sitting with them in a
passive meditational attitude of non-judgment and non-control. it is the
discipline of being present enough to hold all these moving
emotions/thoughts/fears in awareness and allowing that light of your presence to
transmute the baser elements into the sacred. it all involves the conscious,
constant and continual application of the will to seek as best as one knows how?
which is a best that will constantly evolve and is a process unique to each
soul. a process which has few rules and guidelines and even fewer how to?s.
opening the heart to experience is a process invented by the self, or rather,
remembered.



ra speaks of experiencing all things desired, then analyzing, accepting,
forgiving, and distilling the love/light from each catalyst. what is not needed
will fall away they say. that falling away can be a very painful, confusing, and
frightening process. as i understand, many good things are born of intense
suffering and those portions of self that are falling away are, in a very real
sense, dying. they had their time, they had their lifespan, they survived and
fed off of your identification with them, and once their lesson had been
learned, once you have seated your experience higher and identified with a
free-er self that didn?t need their defenses, they fall away in death.



as i understand, the first and most primal objective of any energetic construct
is self-survival. i think that few energies of the personality will seek their
own death. what moves an entity through the trials that break off the dirt
covering our gemlike self is that will emanating from the self that moves far
deeper than the personality. when the veil is thinned and you meet that self
beyond the thick illusion for the first time, seeking of that something more,
begins. when the creator is consciously realized for the first time, the will is
lit on fire and the seeking greatly accelerates, as does the pace and intensity
of suffering. to know that self which has the will to move through personality
through its own small deaths, i personally know of no greater discipline than
the silence reached in meditation.



what crafts our structures that determine how we will process catalyst, is the
disciplined will. the discipline to discern where our energies should be pointed
and the practice of focusing them there. the discipline to seek when we catch
our self in a state of forgetfulness, the discipline to rest when we?ve been
pushing ourselves too hard. the discipline to find the present moment and the
discipline to always try to live the questions by asking, ?who am i?, how may i
serve??



so, i?ll get off the box in a second. control vs will in the sense of the
disciplined personality? many many more slants by the many of you out there. the
disciplined personality has regularized and crystallized energy centers that
process incoming catalyst in organized ways because of its work done day in and
day out in self understanding?. energy moves through those centers in a more
uninhibited and efficient fashion? the less energy you have to devote to
processing catalyst in the lower three, the more that the mundane is brought up
to be perceived by the higher perceptions, and the more easily you feel contact
with the one ? everywhere you look. the disciplined will has been pointed over
and over again in the seeking of the one on the positive path, in which
acceptance is implicit? so that the positive entity has the will and the power
to initiate and sustain an open heart in the face of adversity, to see all as
self, and to know how to serve with that love it feels for all of
creation? walking the steps of unity back into the creator?s heart.



control may well regularize energy patterns, but it shuts off the energy center
which, off or on, distinguishes one polarity from the other ? the heart chakra
which is an energy of acceptance of what is, or, love?



it?s a fine line between these two when you look at them this way but discipline
is done in instilling modes of seeking, thought, and practice that are all means
to acceptance and forgiveness, by choosing and affirming the highest concepts
known or wished for - those desires that are discerned to be of the highest
import and priority. at the same time, while the disciplined personality chooses
the highest road, it recognizes the legitimacy, the beauty, and the rightness of
distortions less than pure and when presented with choice, still continues to
choose the less distorted of configurations.



this may be another way of rephrasing the point amilius was making. disciplined
will says ?yes? to all experience but still selects the way in which it will
process the experience by using its tools of faith, praise, meditation, etc,
that it has available to it. whereas control says ?no? to what is because of
some fear or discomfort and tries to alter the picture to (whether the person
knows it or not) increase negative polarization.



it is really the aspect of self which is called the personality or the
personality shell which the work of discipline is aimed at. the being within is
doing just what its name suggests ? being. it exists, as far as i know, more as
an isness and not as something needing much work or discipline. it is the
personality which must needs be disciplined in order to access that being and
live life from it.



on one path, that discipline will balance and render the personality shell
transparent to that true self within, giving it permission and blessing to do
its work *through* the daily self. on the other path, the discipline is
exercised to reinforce and strengthen that separate, personality shell. knowing
that everything we can perceive in and out of this physical creation is symbol,
as each face has an unseen face beneath that and each unseen face has an
infinite and mysterious face beneath? we know that the beauty of symbols is that
they make themselves available to be defined and understood by the perceiver. so
i guess it is a question of, ?for what means is the will being used to increase
discipline, and discipline used to increase will? ?, which will determine the
polarity of the action.



take for example the diet. ra said that dietary information was not to be taken
literally but only as link or psychological nudge for the body, mind, and
spirit. so both the sts and the sto entity can eat the same exact diet but,
depending on what ends the diet is used for, that same diet has the capacity to
propel each on the other side of evolution from each other. knowing that all
actions and things are symbols: if engaging in a discipline to eat only certain
foods and ignore others is a practice committed to by the self in order to
enable the healing and forgiving process, then the discipline is one not of
control, but of treating the self with love and respect in order to serve
others. if it is one committed to by the self in order to control, manipulate,
and dominate the self, then it is not a discipline of acceptance, but a practice
taken on in order to in order to serve the self.



the self has many secrets which have a greater chance of being unveiled by the
personality which has regularized its processing of incoming catalyst, has
regained its true power to choose to be faithful and see love in awareness. the
discipline personality points the mind and the heart where the truth is felt,
aiming straight for the infinite one. it can suffer with gratitude, with
humility, and a desire to transform from the suffering in order that it might
better serve the creator by serving others. it is disciplined in its seeking, or
what just might be seen as a process of evolving questions which ask the largest
questions, but which ask them with an ever more penetrating sight. the one with
discipline can still become very confused at new situations, can beaten down to
its knees by the hurricanes of inner change, but knows how to move through
storms with the creator and gets better at it each time. it moves through each
layer of the onion and through each series of separation,
initiation, and return, knowing how to exercise greater faith and trust in each
challenge; till it comes to a point where it becomes one with that inner light,
knows who it is and knows the purpose of its life.



thus some become healers, some teachers of new science which could change life
as we know it! : ), some asc2k contributors, and some, great radiators of love
and light to those hurting and without. pick me up love, everyday.



?ra: i am ra. there is but one service. the law is one. the offering of self to
creator is the greatest service, the unity, the fountainhead. the entity who
seeks the one creator is with infinite intelligence. from this seeking, from
this offering, a great multiplicity of opportunities will evolve depending upon
the mind/body/spirit complexes? distortions with regard to the various illusory
aspects or energy centers of the various complexes of your illusion.



thus, some become healers, some workers, some teachers, and so forth.?



wheels of life: ?knowledge of will, with its infinite and constant choices,
comes from a deeper sense of purpose. this purpose is born out of our
orientation to the world.?



q?uo for y?all.



?in so far as there is no discipline, then there is likely to be very little
power



here is how to be joyful: upon the arising, turn to the infinite one and,
instant by instant, turn again to the infinite one, again and again, in all
things giving thanks; in all conditions rejoicing. turn again to the infinite
one and rest in that peace which truly the world does not know. joy is a living
energy as powerful and as effective a teacher as sorrow. however, it demands of
the seeker a self-imposed discipline of the personality which looks beyond ease
and comfort and energizes and exhorts the self again and again unceasingly to
rejoice, give praise and offer thanksgiving to the infinite one.



free will in its raw and untamed state is almost precisely the opposite of true
freedom of will, which is the will of one who is disciplined and freely chooses.
thus, not being blown about by the wind of the self, you may then internalize
the wind and become aware of the spirit. and as you become aware of this spirit
you shall find yourself moved in mind, in emotion, and sometimes even
geographically, in order to do those things which you have not after all
forgotten you came to do.



when feelings arise of guilt and fear to which the entity cannot find any
response, it is then that the entity does well to work upon the discipline of
the personality and the discipline of the will. the discipline of the
personality is involved in such a case in **allowing the entity to sit with, to
accompany, to be one with this feeling, to allow it to express and to give it
respect and to be a witness to it.** the use of the will, then, is that which
asks the personality to let those feelings go, to let them be balanced by the
awareness that all that has been done is all that can be done and that it is
time to move on.



those who seek the path of spirit must also seek the path of discipline. for the
time to do spiritual work is always now, not tomorrow, not last week but right
now.



now, each of you has undoubtedly noted throughout your experience that bits and
pieces of this personality shell will fall away, sometimes for clear reasons,
sometimes for no apparent reason, at a certain point within the incarnational
experience. this instrument has called this the subtraction process, and many
have thought of it as the refining fire that tempers the self. one could see the
action of catalyst and experience on this personality shell as that of the
sculptor who skillfully or awkwardly is attempting to create a new shape out of
the block of stone that is the personality shell. **there is a far more vital
and authentic being resting within this relatively non-vital shell.**
consequently, the spiritual being within the worldly incarnation is as the mine
of precious stones which has been overlaid with dirt. it is a wise and
protective measure, given the circumstances of incarnation. this mining, then,
can be seen as the discipline of the personality. the careful, slow,
almost scientific excavation of the authentic self from the jagged edges and
roughness of the personality shell is the goal of the worker in consciousness
who is attempting the discipline of the personality."



---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
free pop-up blocker - get it now

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Tim McEntee]

dear jeremy and asc2k friends,





i have watched the thread concerning "control vs. will" with interest
over the last few weeks. this morning during meditation, this question
arose in my mind and was followed almost immediately with my mind
following through with an answer. please accept this as my truth only in
the hope that it may also help others in finding their own truth.



those of q'uo have very often emphasized the paramount importance of the
two qualities of "faith" and "will" as the cornerstones for the
conscious seeker. "faith" as i interpret their teachings, is that
quality of surety of purpose, that deep felt certainty of ourselves as
co-creators and of our path to unity with the one creator. based on this
"faith", "will" acts as the driving force to help us follow that path
despite the bumps and suffering along the way. another way of saying
this would be that "faith" is certainty of the reality of knowledge
behind the illusion and "will" is the desire to be one with that
knowledge.



as a consciously seeking entity meets the catalyst of 3rd density
illusion, "will" drives it to respond in certain ways to this catalyst.
the two main ways are with love/acceptance/unity or with
control/rejection/separation. so, it seems to me that the relationship
between "will" and "control" is that "control" is one of the ways in
which the "will" is exercised, the other of course being "love". the
choice of this density being to determine which of those two ways this
"will" is most frequently exercised.



please accept this as my opinion only subject to your own discrimination
for truth.



love and light,



tim.





[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Jeremy Weiland]

dear list, :-)

i just wanted to make sure i thanked everybody for responding to my
post about understanding the difference between control and will in
the discipline of the personality. i have entertained this concept
for some time now, and the ideas offered here have given me much food
for thought.

for me, i think semantics plays a role in confusing the issue. to
me, "will" is not neccessarily a verb i lump into the same category
as "love". it's also difficult for me to see discipline in any other
context than that of self-control. my attempt to work with these
concepts has been hampered by rigid definitions that cloud my ability
to view the practices for abstractly. because of this bias, the
explanation that resonated most highly with me was one that looked at
it in a simpilified manner:

> this may be another way of rephrasing the point amilius was making.
> disciplined will says "yes" to all experience but still selects the
> way in which it will process the experience by using its tools of
> faith, praise, meditation, etc, that it has available to it.
> whereas control says "no" to what is because of some fear or
> discomfort and tries to alter the picture to (whether the person
> knows it or not) increase negative polarization.

because i tend to look at the mystery of creation as a drama of
identity, this works well in my belief system. "will" can be defined
(in the narrow context in which we're using it) as not pushing the
self in a direction, but rather as finding the part of the self that
is already pulling in that direction to begin with. that definition
of will doesn't jive with the connotation of will i'm used to. but
it is a manner of understanding the "control vs. will" dilemna on
slightly different, and easier to grasp, terms.

i never understood the message that "true will is giving up the
personal will to the creator". a course in miracles was one of the
concept complexes by which i was introduced most potently to this
message. in part i think that connotation of will to which i'm
accustomed is just getting in the way. but also it just didn't make
sense: you're either willing something or you're not. you may be
surrendering to the creator, but then you're not making decisions.
how is that more empowering? how is that strengthening the will?
there are two parts that i think i was missing.

one, there is that idea of identity. if you see yourself as the
creator, you are not sacrificing anything (this was a big part of
acim). you are simply letting that which is not needed fall away.
in fact, if you believe you are "giving something up" you're going to
create conflict because you still believe there is value in that
which you are letting go. to identify with the creator is to see
yourself as the creator, and to have a will that exists within you in
a very real way. it is not some abstraction that exists "out there" -
it is within you, lying latent until such time as you weary of the
distractions that take your will and energy elsewhere.

the second part is that of process, seeing life as the process that
gets you there. this is something i really learned from the law of
one because ra embraces the process of life as so important
regardless of the "mistakes" that are made (which really are not
mistakes). the goal is not necessarily to be happy right now,
thought that is possible and admirable. but being realistic, one is
not going to have some profound epiphany and suddenly *be* the
creator and have no conflicts with divine will that exists within.
if it were that easy, this 3d experience would not be necessary! no,
it will be a long process of self trust and self understanding.

but it's even more profound than that: the *process* is what we're
here for, not the end product. we don't even come to this plane with
the intent of achieving enlightenement necessarily. we come from a
place that is enlightened and unified, but we come here to work in
the dark, with a tiny candle as ra puts it. the key is not to see
the self completely so much as to acquire the ability to see better
and better that miniscule part of the self that is illuminated by the
modest light of the candle.

so given that this struggle between control and will is a means to an
end, but not necessarily an end we can see clearly, how do we
understand it and live with it in our day-to-day experience? how
does this factor into the process of knowing and accepting the self,
so that we can eventually identify with and become the creator and
share its will without conflict? i think amilius said it really well
when he put it in terms of yes and no: the positive "will" affirms
that which is, and which one wants to be, while the negative control
suppresses that which it doesn't want to be. i think both polarities
use both methods at some point along the way, but we're speaking in
generalities here. control is the coarse suppressive force used by
the entity who sees itself as a tiny part that must use the rest of
creation. will is finer allowing force that, understand the self and
the creation, can put oneself in a position that naturally allows the
goal to occur. kinda like how kane fights in "kung fu": he just
sorta gets out of the way when his enemies attack. his enemies try
to hit hard, where as kane tries to see the situation clearly and
move accordingly. classic grace vs. power. i think that's sort of
how i understand the question now.

i appreciate the ideas all of you contributed. i am still working
with this concept, so don't let the thread die with me! :-)

love and light,

jeremy

[Chris Hamilton]

i thanked everybody for responding to my
> post about understanding the difference between control and will in
> the discipline of the personality.

hello jeremy,

the first thing that came into my mind was that "will" is our emotional base
and may not get positive feedback from others, so we may suppress it if we
think it will create negative response. a simple example is that, ok, i love
70 and 80 rock-n-roll. my will would like to blast the stuff at work, but i
suppress that because it would produce negative reaction in the workplace:)
my husband laughs at me in the car as i bob my head to the music and sing
too:) i especially have the will pushing me to sing celine dion :) my
singing will is obviously different than my listening will :), but that is
because it is fused with my 3d abilities, which, vocally, i perform celine
dion much better than the who :)

"will" can be defined (in the narrow context in which we're using it) as
not pushing the self in a direction, but rather as finding the part of the
self that is already pulling in that direction to begin with.

chris: yes, an emotional frequency that is part of us to begin with.

> i never understood the message that "true will is giving up the
> personal will to the creator". a course in miracles was one of the
> concept complexes by which i was introduced most potently to this
> message. one, there is that idea of identity.

chris: when we allow universal energies to flow thru us instead of trying to
manage (control) them, we vibrate in unison with the creator. what we want
coincides with what the creator wants (although the creator doesn't really
want, i hope you understand, yes? want is a human term) must go, but hope
others grab on this. jer, you figure out such good discussions :) love

[Paul Kandrah]

--- "jeremy weiland" wrote:
> for me, i think semantics plays a role in confusing the issue. to
> me, "will" is not neccessarily a verb i lump into the same
> category as "love". it's also difficult for me to see discipline
> in any other context than that of self-control. my attempt to
> work with these concepts has been hampered by rigid definitions
> that cloud my ability to view the practices for abstractly.
> because of this bias, the explanation that resonated most highly
> with me was one that looked at it in a simpilified manner:
>
> > this may be another way of rephrasing the point amilius was
> > making. disciplined will says "yes" to all experience but still
> > selects the way in which it will process the experience by using
> > its tools of faith, praise, meditation, etc, that it has
> > available to it. whereas control says "no" to what is because of
> > some fear or discomfort and tries to alter the picture to
> > (whether the person knows it or not) increase negative
> > polarization.
>
> because i tend to look at the mystery of creation as a drama of
> identity, this works well in my belief system. "will" can be
> defined

p: to address the way in which you approach this as much as the
content, of late i also find myself trapped by a rationality that
first must see things with understanding. thank you for that
reflection.

but now i also must ask you: what does the rational mind do,
generally? does it say yes or no?

> but it's even more profound than that: the *process* is what we're
> here for, not the end product. we don't even come to this plane
> with the intent of achieving enlightenement necessarily. we come
> from a place that is enlightened and unified, but we come here to
> work in the dark, with a tiny candle as ra puts it.

p: what is the *process* of the mind? is the mind that tiny
candle? does the rational construct usually illuminate itself?

> the key is not to see
> the self completely so much as to acquire the ability to see
> better and better that miniscule part of the self that is
> illuminated by the modest light of the candle.

[Johnny]

jeremy wrote:
> for me, i think semantics plays a role in confusing the issue. to
> me, "will" is not neccessarily a verb i lump into the same category
> as "love". it's also difficult for me to see discipline in any other
> context than that of self-control. my attempt to work with these
> concepts has been hampered by rigid definitions that cloud my
> ability to view the practices for abstractly. because of this bias,
> the explanation that resonated most highly with me was one that
> looked at it in a simpilified manner:>

jp: yeh, semantics definitely make it tough for me, too. one aspect of
it is that in one sense, it seems the use of will (choice) is in fact
identical to one type of activity we view as control. ("if i were in
charge, i would do whatever i please.") in this regard, i see the will
serving a function like the control panel of a computer (at least, in
the theory for use of a control panel;-).

for this purpose, "disciplinary action" would consist of the way you
choose to follow to make choices re various capabilities available to
you (the will). the 'disciplined personality' could be seen as the
configuration (content, style, priorities) of activity that results.

> > this may be another way of rephrasing the point amilius was making.
> > disciplined will says "yes" to all experience but still selects
> > the way in which it will process the experience by using its tools
> > of faith, praise, meditation, etc, that it has available to it.
> > whereas control says "no" to what is because of some fear or
> > discomfort and tries to alter the picture to (whether the person
> > knows it or not) increase negative polarization. >

jp: wonderful visualization!

> because i tend to look at the mystery of creation as a drama of
> identity, this works well in my belief system. "will" can be defined
> (in the narrow context in which we're using it) as not pushing the
> self in a direction, but rather as finding the part of the self that
> is already pulling in that direction to begin with. that definition
> of will doesn't jive with the connotation of will i'm used to. but
> it is a manner of understanding the "control vs. will" dilemna on
> slightly different, and easier to grasp, terms.
>
> i never understood the message that "true will is giving up the
> personal will to the creator". a course in miracles was one of the
> concept complexes by which i was introduced most potently to this
> message. in part i think that connotation of will to which i'm
> accustomed is just getting in the way. but also it just didn't make
> sense: you're either willing something or you're not. you may be
> surrendering to the creator, but then you're not making decisions.
> how is that more empowering? how is that strengthening the will?
> there are two parts that i think i was missing. >

jp: i think the view of "either willing or not" comes from the notion
that "one size fits all"; this conception may be a throwback to 2nd
dimensional survival 'technology'.

in addition, reliance of western society on the empiricial method has
bred the belief in using controls to analyze cause-effect & predict
(control) behavior. but some are now discarding traditional scientific
methods & adopting innovative approaches. this could be the budding of
new parameters that scientists will use in 4-d. these parameters rely
a great deal more, particularly in relation to psychology, on role &
function of behavior that formerly might have been called 'psychic'.
such behavior soon may be characterized by the dictum, "know thyself."

scientific method in 4-d, like the material body housing the soul in
4-d, will utilize the faculty of observation in lieu of control
variables for the pursuit of knowledge & fulfillment of purpose.

> one, there is that idea of identity. if you see yourself as the
> creator, you are not sacrificing anything (this was a big part of
> acim). you are simply letting that which is not needed fall away.
> in fact, if you believe you are "giving something up" you're going
> to create conflict because you still believe there is value in that
> which you are letting go. to identify with the creator is to see
> yourself as the creator, and to have a will that exists within you
> in a very real way. it is not some abstraction that exists "out
> there" - it is within you, lying latent until such time as you weary
> of the distractions that take your will and energy elsewhere.
>
> the second part is that of process, seeing life as the process that
> gets you there. this is something i really learned from the law of
> one because ra embraces the process of life as so important
> regardless of the "mistakes" that are made (which really are not
> mistakes). the goal is not necessarily to be happy right now,
> thought that is possible and admirable. but being realistic, one is
> not going to have some profound epiphany and suddenly *be* the
> creator and have no conflicts with divine will that exists within.
> if it were that easy, this 3d experience would not be necessary!
> no, it will be a long process of self trust and self understanding.
>
> but it's even more profound than that: the *process* is what we're
> here for, not the end product. we don't even come to this plane with
> the intent of achieving enlightenement necessarily. we come from a
> place that is enlightened and unified, but we come here to work in
> the dark, with a tiny candle as ra puts it. the key is not to see
> the self completely so much as to acquire the ability to see better
> and better that miniscule part of the self that is illuminated by
> the modest light of the candle.
>
> so given that this struggle between control and will is a means to
> an end, but not necessarily an end we can see clearly, how do we
> understand it and live with it in our day-to-day experience? how
> does this factor into the process of knowing and accepting the self,
> so that we can eventually identify with and become the creator and
> share its will without conflict? i think amilius said it really well
> when he put it in terms of yes and no: the positive "will" affirms
> that which is, and which one wants to be, while the negative control
> suppresses that which it doesn't want to be. i think both polarities
> use both methods at some point along the way, but we're speaking in
> generalities here. control is the coarse suppressive force used by
> the entity who sees itself as a tiny part that must use the rest of
> creation. will is finer allowing force that, understand the self
> & the creation, can put oneself in a position that naturally allows
> the goal to occur. kinda like how kane fights in "kung fu": he just
> sorta gets out of the way when his enemies attack. his enemies try
> to hit hard, where as kane tries to see the situation clearly and
> move accordingly. classic grace vs. power. i think that's sort of
> how i understand the question now.
>
jp: thanks for sharing the beautiful expressions.

peace & love, john

[amilius2001]

-
> > the key is not to see
> > the self completely so much as to acquire the ability to see
> > better and better that miniscule part of the self that is
> > illuminated by the modest light of the candle.

hmmm, might the key to appreciating the evolution of will be the
ability to honor that a miniscule part of total awareness allows us
to illuminate the modest light of a candle for the desired
eperience expressed in realization? we are all onelove in
realization of graciously organized design. love is all there is.
amilius

[Seek Up]

december greetings to asc2k,



>jw: i just wanted to make sure i thanked everybody for
> responding to my post about understanding the difference >between control and
will in the discipline of the personality. i >have entertained this concept for
some time now, and the ideas >offered here have given me much food for thought.



thank you jeremy, you and the rest of the gang help me to understand this in
ways my mind doesn?t offer me on its own. i hope others will feed this
discussion too because i certainly don?t have a complete perception, only my
3,000 words of my biased $.02 : ) i have been revisiting this idea to chew on it
ever since you prompted the brain to fire up with it a few weeks ago. thank you
as well for sharing the workings of your mind mr jw... it is a bright one which
has insight stored in it not just for yourself, but for me and the rest of us
too. so share it : )



before responding to your post i wanted to throw out a few ideas that had come
to mind when thinking about discipline. (sorry.) because this globe is a farm of
repeating races from every which where, there are as many orientations as can be
imagined; orientations which have been difficult to unify even with the efforts
many of our teach/learners, so ra says. being born into this free-for-all is a
situation in which, as simple as my head can make it, there are those who
recognize the existence of some variation of a one creator and there are those
who have no faith in a higher intelligence and meaning to the life that they
live.



in one grouping, most who do worship and seek the one are doing it through
dogmatic, outdated, and distorted systems that are replete with wrong turns. in
the other group, everyone else forgot about the divine and used their free will
to reject the reality of their own spirit and heart. each of these general
groups is most likely choosing a variety of unfocused choices ? and creating
great disharmony within and amongst themselves in pursuing things various,
transient, and without eternal substance. the ?evil? state, the chaos, the
unconscious state, or the far cry from grace that this world exists in - can be
summed up in a number of different ways by different people, each with their own
orientation. viewing it all from my orientation, it is all rooted right in the
place that ra credits as the ?root cause of blockage?, that is, **a lack of
love**. however you look at it, it is no wonder that babies grow up to be
fragmented and dissociated people - drawn into the traps of an
illusion.



assuming most of us weren?t trained from the get go of birth to have great
discipline in either accepting our catalyst, or controlling it, we take on a
consensus reality (built of nothing but half-truths and shadows) and create an
identity out of it. because consensus reality is a crock of sh#t (relatively
speaking), it stifles, denies, judges, and forgets the self beyond incarnation
(if taken as an absolute truth).



though the reasons for awakening are as many as there are people - when the
spiritual awakening finally begins, the girl for the first time steps back from
the personality shell, or the fictitious self created in accordance to the
perceived standards of consensus reality, and sees how painful her state of
existing as a separate entity is? or, just what a mess she feels herself to be!
the discipline comes into effect when one begins to study the patterns of one?s
own confusions and begins to feel out what is false, what is true; what is me,
what is not me; what is resonant, what seems off; and begins to feel around to
discover and then claim that land where the truth lies? which is forever and
always ? in the heart. a quest begins and the searching for light takes place
not only in the darkness and unknowing of third-density, but in the utter
blackness of the dark night of the soul.



that discipline may accurately be seen as a re-training of the parental,
societal, and religious training received and made a part of the programming in
the formative years. in general, programming that did indeed teach us *how* to
process catalyst but taught us how to process and view most of our experience
from the standpoint of the lower three chakras: sex, survival, money-making,
career-building, social status-positioning, so on? and, for those blessed with
parents with functioning heart chakras, taught us how to love, and possibly even
the clear and honest communication of the blue ray center.



but, the early training probably did not teach the disciplined ways of conscious
spiritual evolution... which, to the adept, winds up largely to be a working in
the indigo ray. so the self needs to, if it wants to accelerate its growth,
retrain it methods of prioritizing incoming data, of perceiving and feeling
catalyst, and of re-stating and re-affirming its thirst and hunger for the truth
in every single moment it can be remembered. the hardest work ever because it
takes a lot of courage in facing and actually bearing suffering, in
self-honestly and accepting, forgiving, and loving the impossible ? the self.
it?s a job that will bend you, may break you, and will certainly put you through
your own small, and perhaps major, deaths. but, what is changing and dying is
only the illusory self that is becoming a vehicle capable of transmitting and
knowing the love that radiates out from its core. it is work that needs the doin
if you're hungry.



why retrain? because, i don?t know. jeremy or anyone else, for what reasons
would any of you seek discipline? i am still find finding the answer to that
question myself but i do look to a great songwriter/human being named dave
matthews who, in a song wrote, as a lyrical response to being charged for
blowing up the world with a bomb of love, ?i did for the buzz ya know.?



why would you discipline your daily self so that it is not swayed by the
temptations to forget to look for love in the moment? why instill the discipline
to remain centered, grounded, rooted and keep you on the chosen and constantly
evolving course? offering yourself as a balanced seven energy center instrument
for the creator to play and sing a song about love to the world through your
very own body?? beecauuuse? it feels pretty good to love and to experience the
open heart... there is really no better feeling. try and look for one, if you're
a positive being, its tops to be in love. you do it for the buzz, and you do it
because it is your original desire. only a matter of how in tune you are with
that desire.



the more you?re plain aware of it (read: awareness of inner light) the more you
use, harness, collect, and focus your will, with discipline, to reshape the
personality and point/aim it to look to the spirit in the midst of a confused
world that worships matter. desiring to merge with the creator, will carry you
on? but then at some point, you are supposed to stop all action and realize that
you are and always have been, what you are looking for? then you get into
paradoxes which are good fodder for asc2k but which confuse me to try and wrap
my mind around.



> "will" can be defined (in the narrow context in which we're
> using it) as not pushing the self in a direction, but rather as
> finding the part of the self that is already pulling in that
> direction to begin with.



this was an excellent resonating statement. words put another way to the my own
limited understanding on the matter. yeah, you?ve got to find what you are
already using your will for? because if you try to push in a direction opposing
the many wills that have already carved deep channels in your personality,
you?ll find a lot of resistance. thus you?ve first to identify those blockages,
accept em, hug em, love them and ? as if by magic ? they become integrated, you
become whole, you gain their will (kind of like highlander style, kinda), and
use your now larger spotlight to aim straight forward into the darkness to
illumine the way for others and be that fire upon the hill.



>i never understood the message that "true will is giving up the

>personal will to the creator". a course in miracles was one of >the concept
complexes by which i was introduced most potently >to this message. in part i
think that connotation of will to which > i'm accustomed is just getting in the
way. but also it just didn't > make sense: you're either willing something or
you're not. you > may be surrendering to the creator, but then you're not
making
> decisions. how is that more empowering? how is that
> strengthening the will?



you answered your own questions to these below but i would say that true power
comes in self-knowledge. at least that?s what q?uo has me believing.



>there are two parts that i think i was missing.

>one, there is that idea of identity. if you see yourself as the

>creator, you are not sacrificing anything (this was a big part of

>acim).



you know what? this came into my mind today. i remember you stating in several
posts earlier this year or last that you didn?t believe that there was a such a
thing to do as sacrificing. this would be another very interesting thread.



>you are simply letting that which is not needed fall away.

>in fact, if you believe you are "giving something up" you're going > to create
conflict because you still believe there is value in that

>which you are letting go.



which, much conflict there will certainly be before the self wakes up and
realizes that the value lies not in what is to be given up but, what greater
awareness lies underneath that soon-to-go limitation of love.



>to identify with the creator is to see

>yourself as the creator, and to have a will that exists within you >in a very
real way. it is not some abstraction that exists "out >there" -it is within
you, lying latent until such time as you weary >of the distractions that take
your will and energy elsewhere.



i may be playing with semantics here too and in so doing, missing the point yet,
ra says that what is not needed will fall away. i don?t know that they intend
that the person will be consciously acting to look at a distorted energy and
say, ?i let go? and thereby discard, release, and move on. (though, conscious
releasing to the benevolent forces of destiny is an helpful and true exercise.)
those blockages and imbalances of past non-acceptances of what is, do ?fall
away? when you no longer energize them, feed them, call upon them, believe you
need them and believe that they are who you are.



i write all this as a youngin very inexperienced in this lifetime at actually
working with catalyst but, i believe that though you, asc2k?ers, and i, can
write of how we understand these processes to be working, we really can?t see
them in action in our daily lives and know, at any given moment, that this
energy is falling away from me, this behavior i no longer require and find value
in it no more, and thereby morph into a greater self. though i know so very
little and hope someone corrects this point if its written in error, i believe
that we do the work and after passing our own tests, we wake up one day to
realize that we are stronger in some way, or more whole, or we no longer need to
hold onto a stuck energy as it has fallen away from us. dunno. do you understand
the distinction i am trying to make?



like ra may say that at this point in an entity?s development, it will do this,
or do that? and that is definitely what is happening from that great sixth
density perspective but to the entity experiencing incarnation, it doesn?t see
the actual inside functioning of its own computer but is only attempting to look
for love in the moment and trust that all is well and roll with the punches.



(to lay all the cards upon the table, face up, look into the eyes of all the
other players and say inwardly, "all, all of you players, each other-self,
whatever your hand, i love you.")



co-creation, imho, is a choosing to reach higher than most models, to ask what
action or use of will the creator has in mind, and to release it all in the
faith says that what is happening to you right now, is as it should be and is a
force working for you that, if cooperated with, will yield great fruit in
self-discovery and increased levels of service and the capacity to serve.



until full adepthood is reached where all programming is designed for the self
and by the self to feed and balance the higher energy centers, most of this
dance of life is learning just *how* to dance so that you feel the life, the
vitality, and the joy of the dance rush through you and outward into the natural
desire to show others how to dance? because they too are, and always have been,
dancers. the greatest thrill in moving your body to the sounds of the dance is
when you understand that you are not only experiencing the love, you are the
love that is pouring through you? you are the music that keeps your passion
aflame? you are the rhythm that keeps the music in step.



i hope i make sense. i believe the work of becoming conscious is founded upon
the bedrock of faith and is taken on by the will that stands upon that rock and
says, ?creator, i want to know you. who am i?? the work itself isn?t in
understanding how the work is working (though that can be of immense help), the
work is a matter of praying, desiring, asking, and letting what will come, to
come.



that analytical mind that needs to understand how it?s all happening is, as ra
nailed it, at the same time the great virtue and the great handicap of
third-density. the work of prayin, trusting, and so forth, is all done *with the
aid* of the intellect the tool, not the intellect the master. and at each new
juncture the catalyst will come, will be unpredictable, uncontrollable, and
become so increasingly complex if tried to be handled with the organized mind
that the intellect must choose to turn to the heart, give up the fight, jump off
the cliff and surrender the desire to control, along with all the mental
resistance to what already is.



thus you gain awareness of that self within that has the answers to your
identity, knows what to choose and how to choose? because that deeper self has
recognized its window of opportunity that was made possible by the disciplined
personality that has chosen to allow all things (including suffering) and has
chosen to create an environment where illusion falls away in its own time ?
creating room for the hiding, but ever-waiting soul within to merge with the
consciousness that fell from grace. somewhere in the ra material don asks how it
comes to be that the higher self lives life through the incarnational self and
ra says it happens in percentages or increments, i believe. they also said that,
basically, it?s the highest service you could offer to the creator.



the question came to me, ?are there two selves of the m/b/s when working with
the concept of the personality self and the deep self??. well, yeah, i think. ra
speaks of ?merging? with others and with the creator. that personality self has
the work of discipline to enable the merging of its self, with it greater self.
without the discipline of silence to access that authentic self, without self
acceptance, forgiveness, and understanding - that personality shell will remain
a separate and isolated being? a being too fearful to open up to love and trust
a perfect creation. though communication is always happening between that
time/space self and the space/time self, it seems that the case is that the
communication is usually not recognized and the shell can?t see beyond its own
very boxed in cubicle.



at the point that they fall away, you know yourself to be a more noble creature
and a more empowered one, relying less on defending something that isn?t real
and relying less on the illusion to fulfill your desires because you discover
that your desires are nourished in only one place within.. from that source that
loves and gives the ultimate meaning and purpose of life ? that is to spend it
seeking and serving that one in utter devotion and total love. which is a
relationship born in silence and in the grace that allows you to feel the love
that is your birthright but that, at some point in your make-believe life, a
grace you denied yourself because you lost your sense of true worth.



i hope this thread stays alive and flourishes too cuz it has so much potential.
a question might arise from this about what exactly it means when what is not
needed, falls away.



>the goal is not necessarily to be happy right now,

>thought that is possible and admirable. but being realistic, one
> is not going to have some profound epiphany and suddenly *be* > the creator
and have no conflicts with divine will that exists
> within. if it were that easy, this 3d experience would not be
> necessary! no, it will be a long process of self trust and self
> understanding.



hey, it may be long for the rest of you, but i?m planning on being enlightened
at least by next summer : ) no, no, unfortunately for the impatient mind, i
think you?re right man. i have read q?uo speak of how endlessly long and subtle
is the work of soul evolution? yet how endlessly rewarding! spiritual food is
far, far, far better than any of the most delicious dishes of the physical.
peanut butter comes close, but still can?t compare to the heavenly manna. the
spiritual dining table doesn?t have the most comfortable seating however.



you know what though, many realized ones have had brilliant moments in which,
during the course of a moment, an hour, a night, a week, they had a life
changing epiphany that forever changed their perception of who they are as
citizens of the universe? usually though, as i understand it, that moment came
after intense suffering : ( but wait, hold on, they didn?t have asc2k forums ; )
we?re one step ahead yo!



>so given that this struggle between control and will



you used these words to make another point, but now that i think of it, are
control and will really at the opposite ends of the spectrum? is there a versus
involved? the sts entity has great will and great discipline, does it not? will
exists on either path. the positive path back to the creator uses will to
consciously accept more and more of the creation as part of its self and to give
of its vibration in order to serve others. the negative path to the creator uses
the will to control that creation and increase its own personal power by taking
(one way or another) the vibrations of others in order to serve the self.



the negative will, or the will of control, is in the end, a denial of true will
because, as the confederation has defined the two paths with the titles: the
path of that which is, and the path of that which is not. i love the
confederation? of planets? in service? to the one infinite creator.



>i appreciate the ideas all of you contributed. i am still working

>with this concept, so don't let the thread die with me! :-)



i pulled up the sleeves to get dirty here? and i hope some more of y?all try
this, its really good to try your muscles and say, ?this is what i like to think
i know?. the only dumb post is the post not posted. except for drunken posters.



how this all works? what it looks like to those who can, with their intellects,
see into the metaphysical realms? that jeremy, is right up your realm. answers
to those questions are for the 5d minds which this list has an abundance of : )
good luck homies!



love on,

garybean


---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
new yahoo! photos - easier uploading and sharing

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Rosi]

i just have to say that reading the words of gary in response to
jeremy stirred my heart, my soul, and gave me goosebumps all over. i
don't have much to say other than this....love is all there is. it's
all so very simple, yet it seems so complex in this 3d world we live
in.

when i had my little girl, i must say that i experienced and
experience everyday since she came to us, that pure and simple divine
love that we all seek. i now look at those around me, and i see the
most precious, innocent, pure, divine angels. we are all as pure and
as perfect as babies and we all are deserving of that overwhelming
heart-ful unabashed complete love that one bestows upon a new child.
it is nothing but illusion that keeps us from seeing that. i feel so
grateful for the catalyst this child gave to me, so that i could see
this one simple truth.

the one thing that i wish, was that we all could see this. even with
those close to me, they don't understand why or how i could love them
so much with all they do and have done in their lives. my answer, is
that i see you as that perfect baby that you are. all the rest does
not matter.

i want to say to everyone, that i love you. i love you with the love
of a mother that holds her child to her breast, that she might drink
of the love of the creator. i hold you to my heart, that our hearts
might beat as one and i caress and cuddle you that you might always
feel the warmth and depth of that universal love we all so
passionately seek. we are one, we are sacred, let us not forget.

with tears in my eyes, and love in my heart, i click on "send"!
rosi ]

[Tim McEntee]

rosi:

-------

i want to say to everyone, that i love you. i love you with the love
of a mother that holds her child to her breast, that she might drink
of the love of the creator. i hold you to my heart, that our hearts
might beat as one and i caress and cuddle you that you might always
feel the warmth and depth of that universal love we all so
passionately seek. we are one, we are sacred, let us not forget.

-------



gary and rosi, the light shines so brightly from your words and i am so
grateful to be able to receive their beauty. words will not impart the
depth of love i wish to return to you and to all the fragments of the
one infinite and wonderous creator which manifest as our illusion.



tim.







[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Lesley Schultz]

my dearest rosi, l/l & peace to all:

making me cry at my desk, ruining my mascara, heart
overflowing with love....

so hard to hide our loves. thank god we don't have to
do it here.

we love and cherish you too, rosi.

oceans of love and blessings,
~lesley

__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
protect your identity with yahoo! mail addressguard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

[Jeremy Weiland]

> > this may be another way of rephrasing the point
> > amilius was making. disciplined will says "yes"
> > to all experience but still selects the way in
> > which it will process the experience by using
> > its tools of faith, praise, meditation, etc,
> > that it has available to it. whereas control
> > says "no" to what is because of some fear or
> > discomfort and tries to alter the picture to
> > (whether the person knows it or not) increase
> > negative polarization.

> but now i also must ask you: what does the rational
> mind do, generally? does it say yes or no?

imho: the rational mind provides context for the
decision, i believe. it is the way the conscious mind
interfaces with both the material, outside world and
the inner, unconscious world of mind. i don't think
it makes the fundamental choice of vibratory bias, but
it can provide a *model* that can be used to
potentiate a new flow of love/light in the unconscious
mind and spirit. the rational mind provides a way of
making sense of the world so that the will can be
tapped of as much power as possible.

to train the rational mind to make decisions based on
concepts more abstract than those found in the
material 3d world is quite a task, and to balance its
need for proof with the spirit's need for faith, is a
huge part of the discipline that i'm talking about -
the discipline that the conscious mind uses to
indirectly make the "big yes or no" decisions by
training through the making of "little yes or no"
questions in the context of new values and ultimately
new concepts of identity.

much of my views on this is based on the idea put
forth by ra that the mind is fundamental to the entity
recieving balanced love/light. ra speaks of the
"roots of mind" having the ability to filter out
frequencies of love/light by way of certain distortion
complexes. this is what i mean by the rational mind
conceiving of a "model" that allows for new filters to
be replaced. i doubt the rational mind has the
ability to do this at the most fundamental levels that
ra discusses, but by providing models that direct
impact conscious experience, the rational mind
performs a needed learning/teaching tool. the key, of
course, is balance, as always.

hopefully i'm understanding your query correctly.

> > but it's even more profound than that: the
> > *process* is what we're here for, not the end
> > product. we don't even come to this plane with
> > the intent of achieving enlightenement
> > necessarily. we come from a place that is
> > enlightened and unified, but we come here to
> > work in the dark, with a tiny candle as ra puts
> > it.

> p: what is the *process* of the mind? is the mind
> that tiny candle? does the rational construct
> usually illuminate itself?

i'm not sure i have the wisdom to answer that question
sufficiently, but i'll at least grab the chance to
start considering it.

what i meant by the analogy of the candle (i confess i
didn't put it well) was that the entity cannot *see*
the whole self. there is no proof of a greater
existence outside of 3d, outside of the concrete
experience the entity thinks it has had. the candle
represents the dim ability of such an entity to see
these greater parts of the self, those parts that are
hard to understand and identify, and also which are
largely disconnected from a more unifying grasp of the
total mind/body/spirit complex, and the potential
thereof. in a larger sense, what the candle
represents is faith - the ability to see perception
and creation as an inherently intertwined activity,
and therefore to see that all that is necessary is for
the will to move the self in the direction it would.

what is the process of mind? i think one of the
fundamental processes of mind is to evaluate whatever
environmental variables exist and to react
accordingly. the key is how one defines one's
environment, and how one defines oneself. my highest
understanding is that the mind is a tool, and the more
we see that large part of our waking life as
controlled by what is essentially a tool and not
neccessarily the entirety of our being, the more we
can make decisions based on more and more abstract
values associated with higher density experiences.

hope i didn't confuse the subject; these are my
highest understandings right now, and i look forward
to reactions.

jeremy

__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
new yahoo! photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

[Jeremy Weiland]

> for this purpose, "disciplinary action" would
> consist of the way you choose to follow to make
> choices re various capabilities available to you
> (the will). the 'disciplined personality' could
> be seen as the configuration (content, style,
> priorities) of activity that results.

yes, but i suppose where i have problems is in
deciding when discipline becomes repressive. is there
a positive side to repression of those undisciplined
portions of the self? if i deny myself the privilege
of eating hostess ho-ho's, i can look at it as a
matter of self-love, but this still doesn't change the
fact that i see the act of eating those ho-ho's as
unacceptable. somewhere along the line i am rejecting
something, and that troubles me.

thinking about this, however, made me remember that
comment by ra about whether a positive entity
accepting the negative service of enslavement was
desirable. ra commented that you love and accept the
negative entity while rejecting the service. i'll
have to think on that.

love and light,

jeremy

__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
new yahoo! photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

[Johnny]

jeremy weiland <greenlantern113@y...> wrote:
> > for this purpose, "disciplinary action" would
> > consist of the way you choose to follow to make
> > choices re various capabilities available to you
> > (the will). the 'disciplined personality' could
> > be seen as the configuration (content, style,
> > priorities) of activity that results.
>
> yes, but i suppose where i have problems is in
> deciding when discipline becomes repressive. is there
> a positive side to repression of those undisciplined
> portions of the self? if i deny myself the privilege
> of eating hostess ho-ho's, i can look at it as a
> matter of self-love, but this still doesn't change the
> fact that i see the act of eating those ho-ho's as
> unacceptable. somewhere along the line i am rejecting
> something, and that troubles me.
>
> thinking about this, however, made me remember that
> comment by ra about whether a positive entity
> accepting the negative service of enslavement was
> desirable. ra commented that you love and accept the
> negative entity while rejecting the service. i'll
> have to think on that. love and light, jeremy >

jp: if we concur on a definition of repression (see below), i'd say
there is indeed a positive to repression of of undisciplined portions
of self. the challenge seems to lie in the prerequisite task: identify
the discipline that uniquely fits the self. in the process, i am
tempted to feel a standard that fits someone else (or standard i find
to be fit for self) should be fit for all. imo, this lure is what can
lead to a rush to judgment of self ("i can't follow the recommendation
that someone else suggested i follow") &/or of others ("i think you
should do what works for me.")

this discernment, however, doesn't resolve the problematic nature of
discipline, which is to identify that which uniquely fits the self. it
only points to a general protocol any one can apply in the example you
gave of seeking self-love. to find the discipline that is uniquely fit
for self, imo, one first needs to consider the unique condition of the
material self, seek awareness of options & their consequences, then in
faith, seek the guidance of intuition.

in disciplining the personality, one might consider self-love to be a
form of liberation; control, a form of oppression. in this vein, ask
if the methods & objectives one is seeking will help to further or
deter from the capacity of one & other self to use free will.

peace & love, john

p.s.: here are definitions:
"the island is the ego, the knowing, willing 'i', the centre of
consciousness. but what belongs to consciousness, what i know about
myself and the world, and can direct and control, is not fully
conscious all the time. i forget, or i repress what i do not like, or
what is not socially acceptable. (repression means a more or less
deliberate and continuous withdrawal of attention, so that the
thought, feeling, event, which is to be repressed is at last expelled
from consciousness, and we are unable to recall it. suppression -
which is sometimes confused with repression - is the necessary
withdrawal of attention from some things so that we can attend to
others, but in this case they can be recalled at will.)" (source: "an
introduction to jung's psychology"; frieda fordham, ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ムâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒ ã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â© frieda fordham
1953, 1959, 1966.)

[Chris Hamilton]

so much in your post here, gary, was so great :) i really loved it. it was
as if each of everyone's minds here here were toying with the same thoughts
and they were are being put on paper thru your fingers. and rosi, my gosh, i
wish i had gone to louisville seminar, not huntsville, cuz i missed meeting
this wonderful earth mother :) but i do suppose 'baby' has contributed much
towards that light :) children are the great nurturing ground for feminine
energy, our teacher in many ways......anyway, although everything in this
post was so excellent, i pulled one paragraph out to comment on. maybe
others can pick other pieces, because this post is really excellent gary.
chris

gary: until full adepthood is reached where all programming is designed for
the self and by the self to feed and balance the higher energy centers, most
of this dance of life is learning just *how* to dance so that you feel the
life, the vitality, and the joy of the dance rush through you and outward
into the natural desire to show others how to dance. because they too are,
and always have been, dancers. the greatest thrill in moving your body to
the sounds of the dance is when you understand that you are not only
experiencing the love, you are the love that is pouring through you. you are
the music that keeps your passion aflame. you are the rhythm that keeps the
music in step.

chris: i know that some of you have seen alex grey's artwork. some haven't,
but he really shows this energetic dance thru life that gary talks about
http://www.alexgrey.com/ . gary is piercing thru the 3d film and seeing
beneath and thru it, and speaking his experience, yet communicating to all
of us how this dance feels. i suppose that gary is a visual writer (and very
good at that) who can help others see the unseeable, just like grey does
with pictures. your writing isn't too long gary. it is just what we need :)
love.

[Luis Albanés]

dear all:

inspired by your posts, i visited a page i havnãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚ â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â´t for some time, and it has
exelent information on how to get to th unity:

the formula of compassion,
the 1st multidimensional key of compassion

the url is: http://www.nibiruancouncil.com/html/formulaarticle.html

in love and light.

luis




---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
yahoo! net: la mejor conexiãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚ â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â³n a internet y 25mb extra a tu correo por $100 al
mes.


[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[David Wilcock]

from: luis albanãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã ‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â ‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â©s

dear all:

inspired by your posts, i visited a page i havnãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚ â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â´t for some time, and it
has exelent information on how to get to th unity:

the formula of compassion,
the 1st multidimensional key of compassion

the url is: http://www.nibiruancouncil.com...

dw: dear luis,

with all due respect (and you are a relatively new member so you
wouldn't already know about this) we have repeatedly asked people not to
post links to channeled material outside of our focus list, which is a
product of extensive research.

there are some very significant distortions in this material, from the
philosophical perspective of the law of one series. we are here to
support and honor that perspective.

please don't take this personally. i am sure that there are aspects of
what you read that resonate with you. by having these guidelines in
place, we give our 550 members more of what they joined for - discussion
of the law of one series, and confidence in the purity of the material
in question.

peace be with you -

- david