A doubt on wishful thinking in STO vs STS

s.m.j.raj

Padawan Learner
Hi! I just got a doubt while reading the following content when compared to transcripts is little bit not understand the part of wishes, can anyone explain the sentence made bold in the following with the contrast to the transcript further below.

The Wave Chapter 28: Technicians of Ecstasy: The Shamanic Initiation Of The Knighted Ones Part 1

Service-to-Self seeks to dominate and take all in order to stuff its black hole of fear. To send love (or to give anything) with the intention of changing, transforming, or making anything different than what it is, is to seek domination. For the Service-to-Others polarity to allow itself to be manipulated by deceptive teachings of “sending love and light to transform the world” amounts to the ipso facto acceptance of dominance, the damping of its own frequency, the loss of amplitude. Service-to-Others seeks to give all of self to others, but, because the chief thing it wishes to give is free will, it only gives when asked. Sounds like a marriage made in heaven, yes? One side wants to take; one side wants to give. Go for it, right?

The idea that those of the STO frequency must not give without being asked is a subtle thing. The concept inherent in asking is that of willing exchange. The asking is the giving of the one who asks. The response is the giving of the one who is asked. If there is anything in either of them that expects any change other than the explicit asking and giving, the interaction falls into STS and not STO. (And one must consider, just what is asking? Some people may verbally ask, but the intention is manipulative, designed for the exact opposite of what they appear to be asking. Others may not ask verbally, but it is clear that they are asking with their actions or their very situation. This is where knowledge becomes so valuable.)


January 14, 1995

Q: (L) So, STO wishful thinking...

A: STO does not wishfully think.

Q: (L) Well, how does STO think? (T) Responsibly... (L)[experiencing acute pinching feeling at nape of neck] God! You guys are doing strange things to my body...

A: Helpful and balanced. Wishes are strictly STS.
 
Hi s.m.j.raj,

I think it’s clear if you read all three sections as one continuous concept, the first one presents the concept of STS and STO as most people (me included initially) would understand it, one polarity wants to give and the other one wants to take. And then the paragraph ends with a question that highlights the fact that seeing it as such is in reality seeing an STS dynamic. If one thinks of STO as one wishing to give, then one isn’t thinking about STO, because wishing isn’t STO.

Then the next paragraph highlights the subtlety of the act of giving when asked and how asking itself is a form of giving as well. In that sense, the dynamic might look superficially similar, but it’s fundamentally different, because there’s no wishing involved, only a response to a request.. so to speak.

And then the section of the transcripts cements the concept presented in those two paragraphs: Wishing isn’t STO.

I hope the above makes sense.
 
I guess the confusion is related to use of the literal meaning of the word "Wish" instead of context in the sentence.
Service-to-Self seeks to dominate and take all in order to stuff its black hole of fear. To send love (or to give anything) with the intention of changing, transforming, or making anything different than what it is, is to seek domination. For the Service-to-Others polarity to allow itself to be manipulated by deceptive teachings of “sending love and light to transform the world” amounts to the ipso facto acceptance of dominance, the damping of its own frequency, the loss of amplitude. Service-to-Others seeks to give all of self to others, but, because the chief thing it wishes to give is free will, it only gives when asked. Sounds like a marriage made in heaven, yes? One side wants to take; one side wants to give. Go for it, right?
I don't think what Laura meant by "Wish" above is same as what C's meant in the context below. I could be wrong though.
Q: (L) Well, how does STO think? (T) Responsibly... (L)[experiencing acute pinching feeling at nape of neck] God! You guys are doing strange things to my body...

A: Helpful and balanced. Wishes are strictly STS.
In English, people tend to not to use same word multiple times. For example in the article title, if one wants to say Russia twice, one time they will replace with Moscow.
Looked for comparison of dictionary meaning
Re: Difference between Seek and Want
seek (s?k)

v., sought (sôt), seek·ing, seeks.

v.tr.
To try to locate or discover; search for.
To endeavor to obtain or reach: seek a college education.
To go to or toward: Water seeks its own level.
To inquire for; request: seek directions from a police officer.
To try; endeavor: seek to do good.
Obsolete. To explore.
v.intr.

To make a search or investigation: Seek and you will find.


[Middle English sechen, seken, from Old English s?can.]

want (w?nt, wônt)

v., want·ed, want·ing, wants.

v.tr.
To desire greatly; wish for: They want to leave. She wants a glass of water. See synonyms at desire.
To desire (someone to do something): I want you to clean your room.
To request the presence or assistance of: You are wanted by your office.
To seek with intent to capture: The fugitive is wanted by the police.
To have an inclination toward; like: Say what you want, but be tactful.
Informal. To be obliged (to do something): You want to be careful on the ice.
To be without; lack. See synonyms at lack.
To be in need of; require: ??Your hair wants cutting,? said the Hatter? (Lewis Carroll).
v.intr.
To have need: wants for nothing.
To be destitute or needy.
To be disposed; wish: Call me daily if you want.

[I found it on Answers.com]
 
I think,
I guess the confusion is related to use of the literal meaning of the word "Wish" instead of context in the sentence.

I don't think what Laura meant by "Wish" above is same as what C's meant in the context below. I could be wrong though.
I agree with seek10. Strictly speaking the word "wish" may not be suitable (but note I'm not English so I may be wrong) when referring to STO because it implies a desire to change something which is considered/judged as not right, and most of the time it implies also an anticipation of the wished/desired issue (and this is STS thinking). Wishful thinking is based on subjective assumptions and not objective reality.

What STO beings give, when truly asked, help the one who asks to better understand objective reality so that he/she can actually have a real power of choice, but regardless of the fact that he/she will make a good use of what has been given or not.
But I suppose one can use the word "wish" for STO when the only thing wished is to give free will;-)
 
With this topic and oportunity may I ask if I'm understand it correctly? If we could consider some example, the STO is when you walk trought the street and you meet child which was searching for candy shop. You know where it is so you try your best to say it to that child and later everyone in their own direction. STS is when you walk trought the street and you meet child which for you is very beatifull and because of that you want to show him where is candy shop and give him money for candies. Am I right?
 
Hi! I just got a doubt while reading the following content when compared to transcripts is little bit not understand the part of wishes, can anyone explain the sentence made bold in the following with the contrast to the transcript further below.

The Wave Chapter 28: Technicians of Ecstasy: The Shamanic Initiation Of The Knighted Ones Part 1

Service-to-Self seeks to dominate and take all in order to stuff its black hole of fear. To send love (or to give anything) with the intention of changing, transforming, or making anything different than what it is, is to seek domination. For the Service-to-Others polarity to allow itself to be manipulated by deceptive teachings of “sending love and light to transform the world” amounts to the ipso facto acceptance of dominance, the damping of its own frequency, the loss of amplitude. Service-to-Others seeks to give all of self to others, but, because the chief thing it wishes to give is free will, it only gives when asked. Sounds like a marriage made in heaven, yes? One side wants to take; one side wants to give. Go for it, right?

The idea that those of the STO frequency must not give without being asked is a subtle thing. The concept inherent in asking is that of willing exchange. The asking is the giving of the one who asks. The response is the giving of the one who is asked. If there is anything in either of them that expects any change other than the explicit asking and giving, the interaction falls into STS and not STO. (And one must consider, just what is asking? Some people may verbally ask, but the intention is manipulative, designed for the exact opposite of what they appear to be asking. Others may not ask verbally, but it is clear that they are asking with their actions or their very situation. This is where knowledge becomes so valuable.)


January 14, 1995

Q: (L) So, STO wishful thinking...

A: STO does not wishfully think.

Q: (L) Well, how does STO think? (T) Responsibly... (L)[experiencing acute pinching feeling at nape of neck] God! You guys are doing strange things to my body...

A: Helpful and balanced. Wishes are strictly STS.

There is a very subtle difference which makes most people's prayers unreceivable upstairs. We pray that the Light knows what's right and that we ask for the Light to show us how wrong we can be in expecting what the Light should/ would do. We pray to SHARE AS MUCH LIGHT AS POSSIBLE to others, and thus expect that there will be less for us. Yet in Light as in Gurdjieff's hydrogens some Light/ Air/ Hydrogen have more subtle qualities that activate parts of us until then unknown to us!
At least that is my present understanding!
 
"Wishing to give" is not the same thing as "wishing" in the sense of wishfully thinking. It's a subtle, but important difference. Perhaps you just didn't catch that?

By your quote my understanding of the "wishing to give" is outward and "wishing" is inward. Am i correct in anyway?
 
"Wishing to give" is not the same thing as "wishing" in the sense of wishfully thinking. It's a subtle, but important difference. Perhaps you just didn't catch that?

By your quote my understanding of the "wishing to give" is outward and "wishing" is inward. Am i correct in anyway?

I just want to know that STO have desire or wish?

Because if an individual is seeing all as one and one is all then it is evident that he is free from desires or wishes and only does necessary things for the situations to learn and complete cycle. Now, if he is only doing necessary things then he does not have wish or desire. On influence it may vary according to the will of the individual.

Note: I am not fluent in english language so i wanted to understand the perspective of written!
 
There is a very subtle difference which makes most people's prayers unreceivable upstairs. We pray that the Light knows what's right and that we ask for the Light to show us how wrong we can be in expecting what the Light should/ would do. We pray to SHARE AS MUCH LIGHT AS POSSIBLE to others, and thus expect that there will be less for us. Yet in Light as in Gurdjieff's hydrogens some Light/ Air/ Hydrogen have more subtle qualities that activate parts of us until then unknown to us!
At least that is my present understanding!

Hi guimondaniel,
Yes it is but thinking for the answer of that question makes a pattern so that we can find answers but ofcourse it is according to the receptors capability but still we can find answers in future!
 
By your quote my understanding of the "wishing to give" is outward and "wishing" is inward. Am i correct in anyway?


Not precisely. "Wishing to give" is only one way of describing the STO state. The words are actually inadequate to really describe it. But, so it is with trying to translate higher realities into very limited language.

There is a quote from Gurdjieff describing an esoteric group that probably comes closer but naturally, with more verbiage. Hopefully, one of the members of the forum will recall where it is and post it.
 
Hi guimondaniel,
Yes it is but thinking for the answer of that question makes a pattern so that we can find answers but ofcourse it is according to the receptors capability but still we can find answers in future!

The future is forever NOW - at this stage... Soon, the future will be behind us!
Now that is fascinating as a possibility! Thank you for bringing your questions to the table, they are not so simple to answer with our present tools! There is somewhat slippage between the old "me" and the present "me". If you feel it you can perceive the choice of words, just like ancient texts, many at first seem "out there" and then from chaNGING OUR INNER STATES THEY BECOME "INTERNALISED" AS ABSOLUTE????
 
I enjoyed different perspectives!

I say transformation of one's perspective which becomes one's life, destiny, path, religion, community etc.,(everything)

In 3D perspective: Thanks for all, for the assistance and time spent for my questions to answer!
 
Not precisely. "Wishing to give" is only one way of describing the STO state. The words are actually inadequate to really describe it. But, so it is with trying to translate higher realities into very limited language.

There is a quote from Gurdjieff describing an esoteric group that probably comes closer but naturally, with more verbiage. Hopefully, one of the members of the forum will recall where it is and post it.
Is this the one you were thinking of?
The humanity to which we belong, namely, the whole of historic and prehistoric humanity known to science and civilization, in reality constitutes only the outer circle of humanity, within which there are several other circles… consisting so to speak of several concentric circles.

“The inner circle is called the ‘esoteric’; this circle consists of people who have attained the highest development possible for man, each one of whom possesses individuality in the fullest degree, that is to say, an indivisible ‘I,’ all forms of consciousness possible for man, full control over these states of consciousness, the whole of knowledge possible for man, and a free and independent will. They cannot perform actions opposed to their understanding or have an understanding which is not expressed by actions. At the same time there can be no discords among them, no differences of understanding. Therefore their activity is entirely coordinated and leads to one common aim without any kind of compulsion because it is based upon a common and identical understanding.
 
If one wishes for things, in like having a fantasy, be it anything. Is that wishful thinking? If it doesn't affect how you act in the real world and you know that it is just a fantasy that you just do because it is just thoughts that you want to think through. As long as you keep it a fantasy, and not behave like that is it somehow the reality, it isn't much of a big deal?

I do fantasize about things from time to time but I also like to have have clear mind, not being drowned in erratic thoughts. It can be things like mind powers, psychical powers, knowledge, situations, scenarios, money, housing, change and so on, with a little story line. Like a conscious dream story. So the fantasies last as long as I am intending to think about them. But the wishes may remain to a varying degree or I let them go. But I am of course also focusing on my real life situation, taking care of oneself, as we all should do.

Reading the Casswiki, wishful thinking is when one values ones subjective preference over knowledge of the objective state of matters. That seems to me, to be describing a behavior and not just also the thinking. Like trying to put a square in a round hole/imposing one's action where it doesn't fit.

Is there are a distinction here? Or am I dwaling in STS wishful thinking?

So when the 'Powers that be' wishfully think, is that what is hinted at, when you guys/Cassiopeans talk of wishful thinking? That they sit and fantasize how they will dumb us all down, because they are better than us? That their view on things is the only worthwhile view? Then acting out their evilness - their subjective preference - not in accordance with the rest of reality?

Wishful thinking
According to the Cassiopaeans, wishful thinking is a fundamental property of the service to self orientation. The core idea of ”wishful thinking” is that one values one’s personal subjective preference over knowledge of the objective state of matters. This is a statement to the universe to the effect that the being does not wish to exist in said universe because the being’s fantasies are preferred. This then ties with the idea of the thought center of non-being and separation of self from all which is. In the third density, wishful thinking does not physically bend reality, it only hampers perception. Accordingto the Cassiopaeans, the case is differentin the fourth density, in whichwishful thinking has the effect of quite concretely forming a sort of reality bubble. In densities beyond the fourth, beings cannot exist in pure service to self, presumably because the increased freedom of these densities would make it so the entity simply collapsed on itself and ceased interacting – either living fully in a solipsistic bubble, or collapsing into inanimate matter.
 
Back
Top Bottom