Session 18 May 2019

alkhemst

Jedi Council Member
@alkhemst
Then we see the pattern: That the laws that exist in the world are only more complex developments of the General Law and this General Law is part of the STS nature in which we are living.

From the laws of the Old Testament to present international human rights laws etc ... are all arrangements of the general law.

*Note how current generations have this tendency to be exaggeratedly empathic, altruistic and how the laws conform to this in the form of political correctness.

I will continue to elaborate later.
There's always good rules and bad rules. If we follow rules mindlessly without considering their impact in practice, where's our discernment?

It might be that our head is saturated with black and white beliefs and ideologies, so our ability to discern is severely compromised. So we think we're doing "good" or acting "moral" despite the facts demonstrating otherwise.

Imagine if everyone who came to this forum had high functioning thinking, feeling and physical centres? Would guidelines need to be articulated? I've got a rule that anyone visiting my home doesn't go around breaking things on purpose. I don't need to tell people that because I wouldn't invite someone like that in. The point is, there are rules, whether or not written down.

When they are written, like the Ten Commandments, might it indicate the people were thinking, feeling and acting in discordant and harmful ways? If that's right the fact we have thousands and thousands of laws, statutes, policies, rules etc. might say more about our current social condition than about the quality of laws in general. That's my guess anyway.

But at what point does a rule become accepted as law? One maxim about law, as far as I remember is it has to be consistent. So these rules that don't apply to a "special class" of people, allowing them to be above the law, don't fit this basic maxim of law. That kind of thing is the result of there being no rule of law in a society. In other words, those rules aren't strictly speaking, law.

My take on Paul is that being more fully integrated in ourselves (coming from a position of love) means we implicitly follow the law. So laws don't need to be explicit, stated or written etc. Those would be only the kind of laws that have universal appeal as opposed to rules that benefit the few, that is.
 

Seato

Jedi
But at what point does a rule become accepted as law? One maxim about law, as far as I remember is it has to be consistent. So these rules that don't apply to a "special class" of people, allowing them to be above the law, don't fit this basic maxim of law. That kind of thing is the result of there being no rule of law in a society. In other words, those rules aren't strictly speaking, law.
I think this basically summarizes one of the main problem with laws on earth. That it seems laws are rarely enforced equally among the populations of the world. Many police in America essentially get away with murder, whilst political pedophilia and abuse is overlooked or covered up. America itself flagrantly violates international law with its presence in Syria among other activities.

These exemptions make the law unable to truly perform its purpose of protection of the populous, as not everyone is held to the same standard. And as a result fails to encourage morality in those who rule.
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Imagine if everyone who came to this forum had high functioning thinking, feeling and physical centres? Would guidelines need to be articulated? I've got a rule that anyone visiting my home doesn't go around breaking things on purpose. I don't need to tell people that because I wouldn't invite someone like that in. The point is, there are rules, whether or not written down.

When they are written, like the Ten Commandments, might it indicate the people were thinking, feeling and acting in discordant and harmful ways? If that's right the fact we have thousands and thousands of laws, statutes, policies, rules etc. might say more about our current social condition than about the quality of laws in general. That's my guess anyway.

But at what point does a rule become accepted as law? One maxim about law, as far as I remember is it has to be consistent. So these rules that don't apply to a "special class" of people, allowing them to be above the law, don't fit this basic maxim of law. That kind of thing is the result of there being no rule of law in a society. In other words, those rules aren't strictly speaking, law.

My take on Paul is that being more fully integrated in ourselves (coming from a position of love) means we implicitly follow the law. So laws don't need to be explicit, stated or written etc. Those would be only the kind of laws that have universal appeal as opposed to rules that benefit the few, that is.
@alkhemst ,

High functioning centers may be the difference for those who need external laws/rules and those who have their own guidelines.

Session 7 September 2013:
Q: (L) Alright. I think probably what our group members, at least on the FOTCM forum, would be interested in knowing is: What was the deal with {name redacted}?

A: Personality clash.

Q: (L) Personality clash with me personally?

A: Yes

Q: (L) And what was the nature of this clash?

A: She wanted to dominate.

Q: (L) Weird way to dominate. Was her way of dominating by manipulating pity and all that sort of thing?

A: Isn't that usually the way? But notice the pity was reserved for the self.

Q: (L) Are you saying that it's something like narcissism?

A: Rampant!

Q: (L) Anything further than that, or deeper than that?

A: Usually a sign of those lacking a magnetic center.

Q: (L) Hmm. Is it kind of like this article I was re-reading the other day about endoskeletons versus exoskeletons where exoskeleton-type people according to this guy's theory are kind of like people who need rules on the outside because they're unable to integrate anything on the inside? {See: Moral Endo-skeletons and Exo-skeletons: A Perspective on America's Cultural Divide and Current Crisis -- Sott.net }

A: Close. What is inside is so infantile it cannot see beyond the self.
 
Last edited:

Curious Beagle

The Force is Strong With This One
spiritual law of unity vs duality is quite advance concept try discussing the basic pieces of puzzle that c said throughout the year otherwise duality concept will be too difficult to solve (to my knowledge C hasn't mentioned it too). Clue: enlightenment is knowing yourself try forming your own opinion (I believe a french man was banned for saying it). If you can't grasp it conceptually you can't execute it aka fail creation. I can't explained it to you since i was banned for making things up about love and being aware of your personal flaw/vices.
 
Top Bottom