[ahimel]

Klamachpin:

I found your post extremely interesting. You say you're not polarized, but your post reads as coming from someone of quite high consciousness. You read as being mostly content with who you are and comfortable in your center. But you also read -- to me -- as a lightworker in most cases. I've made a collection of your quotes that I find lightworkery and put them in purple below.

So the question that comes to mind is -- WHY should that be? It's been said that the light and dark paths lead to the same places, and this post would certainly be very strong evidence of that if it were written by a high-level darkworker. But you say you're not that either. It leaves me confused. And I can't theorize much, since all I have is your post. So I'm going to bring up questions. Since many of them will be relatively personal, I can't ask you to answer them in this public forum. But I'd be grateful to know as much as you're willing to share, whether it's additional data, or simply your own theories and interpretations.

Originally Posted by Klamachpin

not quite figuring out how to accomplish goals of contribution and legacy via utilizing fear energy.

OK, that's the single most lightworkery quote, to me. Why do you consider yourself darkworkerish if your goal is contribution?

One of the biggest problems I see in these discussions is a confusion of terms. The inward/outward pairing causes the issue of balance to appear. The light/dark pairing has issues with social conditioning. The love/fear pairing brings into play a relation between polarity and stages of awareness that is not true. Other pairings I’ve seen on the boards are just as inadequate – these concepts are difficult to condense into words. What's important, though, is attempting to understand the concepts without giving power to the words themselves. Recognizing the words as simple descriptors by detaching the social connotations/emotions from those words helps greatly in understanding the concepts put forth.

This is very true. People also tend to mix up "pushing outwards" with "Only moves outwards", although this latter is clearly an impossibility (at least for very long.)

I'd be happy to entertain different terminology. Even "Jedi" and "Sith" might be an improvement, since, although they do have good/evil connotations, they're less heavily ingrained than the connotations of light and dark. I'll give it a shot and see how it goes....

Given infinite time, money, and skill, what I will choose to do is also to help others. It is just that I'm not active in giving help to others. Instead, I choose to become a resource that others can draw upon. This way, I'm sure that the help I produce will be quality aid to those whom would benefit. Should I simply give great quantities of limitless aid, I'd not only be unsure of if my help was affecting the right people, but my help could potentially be harmful to those whom misinterpret it.

Do you consider this a trait of Sith? It seems to me that part of the duty of a Jedi is to give responsibly. It doesn't count as "giving" unless you actually provide value. And providing booze to a drunk or calculus assistance to a person taking algebra is clearly not valuable. A Jedi doesn't give blindly, just tossing random stuff into the ocean of humanity and hoping it does some good, any more than a Sith just randomly goes around grabbing stuff. Both have goals, and both move intelligently towards those goals.

It is not what I fear that motivates me to help others - it is the recognition that others have not conquered their fears yet. By ruling over my own fears I serve as an example to those whom are powerless against their fears. By increasing my own knowledge, status, and wisdom I increase my visibility to those looking for a beacon of hope. By requiring that those I befriend help me, I teach those I aid to recognize their responsibility of contribution while those I refuse are shown my truth that nothing comes without a cost.

OK, this is somewhat Sith-y. And yet, if I replaced "conquered" with "transcended", it becomes very Jedi-y. So I'm not sure if it's actually a Sith quote, or simply a difference in terminology.

From my perspective, it would be extremely easy for a lightworker to be a jerk. Lightworkers constantly give of themselves in the best manner they can provide. They focus on giving quantity. Unfortunately, many of those whom a lightworker seeks to aid do not wish to receive assistance, and those who wish to receive may not be satisfied with the help the lightworker provides. In either poor scenario, the lightworker is seen as a jerk.

With the darkside method, people come to take aid from you, and if you are smart about it you allow them to take what they believe they need from you. There are limits, of course. You must watch over those whom you aid to make sure they are not acting out of greed or sloth. The only ways you can be seen as a jerk is if there is a misunderstanding between you and your client, either actively (i.e. “no, you can do your homework on your own!”) or passively (i.e. “sorry, I don’t understand multiple variable calculus either”).

I should perhaps clarify that by "jerk" I mean something more like, "Evil ********************* tyrant of doom." Someone who goes around kicking puppies and throwing old ladies off of sinking ships and playing mind games with innocent children to make them cry, someone who has no respect for the value of life and thinks it's perfectly acceptable to kill a subordinate for questioning your orders.

Misunderstandings can certainly happen between any two people, regardless of polarity. All of your examples above are essentially misunderstandings - the Jedi assumed that the person would want help, or that s/he could provide adequate help. The Sith assumed greater competence than the student actually had, or the student presumed greater competence than the Sith actually had. I wouldn't say that polarity played any part in it at all.

Casual murder is an entirely different topic.

Also, who says I focus on giving quantity? On the contrary, I don't expect to be able to help very many people right now. So I focus instead on giving the best help I can give.

The “easily taken advantage of” part is a difference of perception, though. It’s not that I’m easily manipulated, but rather that I readily submit to acts of aid that meet two conditions: it draws upon my resources in a useful manner, and it does not significantly hurt me or my goals.

People are often surprised at the resistance I put up to something that goes against my values – even if it is something commonly perceived as harmless. This often puts me at odds with the in-crowds, though I am not seen as specifically deviant or outcast… just different and sometimes confusing.

I define this as "honor" ("Honor is what you know about yourself. Reputation is what others know about you. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it may. And outlive the bastards." -Aral Vorkosigan) It's been something I've been working on as I move towards enlightenment -- standing up for what's right, even if it's a small instance of right. And you're right, it does make one a bit outcast, whether Jedi or Sith.

As far as competition goes, remember that not all competition comes from other humans. It can be from nature, yourself, fate, karma, or other sources. At worst, each instance of competition is an obstacle to be overcome and conquered, similarly to fear. At best it is a learning experience. As a darkworker, you want competition as it hones your skills and grants you experiences. To be without competition is to be bored, idle, ineffective.

This is a true statement regardless of polarity. I would never want to stop growing. I may enjoy occasional moments of rest, but I wouldn't want the traditional Christian vision of heaven -- perfect all the time, with nothing to do. And I don't even mind engaging in competition with other people, as long as it's competition intended to help both parties grow. I only object to competition that raises one person up at the other person's expense.

If I had to make a choice, I’d rather live in the company of darkworkers. At least then you absolutely know that your contributions are being utilized to their maximum potential, and your resources are vastly knowledgeable, and always seeking to gain more of the same things you want. Status would become relevant to specific types of knowledge and experience, rather than social standings. With higher awareness darkworkers, social standings become obsolete, and cooperation against the largest competitions becomes the rule.

When you say "social standings", what do you mean? Do you mean the mostly-arbitrary charisma-and-intimidation based rankings prevalent in most social groups? Or do you mean the concept of rankings at all? It seems to me that lack of ranking is completely anathema to Sith. Ranking based on ability, perfectly fine, but I can't imagine Sith building power and standing in order to get past power and standing... explain to me my error.

Like I say, I found it fascinating. I hope you will continue to post.

PS: your signature rocks!