Darkworkers and lightworkers... anyone think this is too simple?

[pyrogen]

Anyone else think that the dark/light dichotomy is too simplistic? The more I try to understand it, the more I think of other possibilities...

1) One path I read about, and briefly considered studying, aligned with something very different from lightwork or darkwork energy, although if you had to pick it would mostly be on the darkwork side (because passion and personal power are important to it). The particular spiritual path is Feri Tradition, so if anyone else is familiar with this, they can give their .02. Would this be considered lightwork or darkwork?

2) I think there is a polarity that transcends both... the chaos principle?

3) Lightwork and darkwork can have the "roundback phenomenon" (where go far enough, and it meets "round the back" with the opposite polarity)

4) I think the definition of darkwork as "siding with evil" (as some people are interpreting it) is problematic.

Lightwork vs darkwork IMHO seem to be a way to try to polarize LOA/PD/New Age into a "right hand" vs "left hand" path... but even right vs left was never personified as good vs evil...

Anyone?

[Brutha]

4) I think the definition of darkwork as "siding with evil" (as some people are interpreting it) is problematic.

That doesn't happen to be the way that most people who defend the concept define it.

Anyone else think that the dark/light dichotomy is too simplistic?

It's supposed to be simple.
Simplicity creates clarity. The argument is that you actually gain something from having clarity in your life.

Saying that Zen Buddhism is too simplistic would be similar.

[Michael Chui]

There's inward, and then there's outward. I'm sure that, if you put some effort into it, you could make up more. But at that point, you need to ask whether or not there's any purpose to it.

Actually, asking whether there's any purpose to the lightworker/darkworker bits might be worthwhile, too. Why bother with more levels if that one is too much?

[dwixi]

I guess its like saying if your happy or sad.
Your always one or the other but there are also loads of other emotions to take into account.

[Tereza Sykorova]

The value of a concept lies in its usefulness. If a concept is not useful to you as it is, than don't worry about its accurateness. Just forget about it.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by dwixi

I guess its like saying if your happy or sad.
Your always one or the other but there are also loads of other emotions to take into account.

You are not always either a lightworker or a darkworker. By definition, both types are a very small percentage of the population. I believe the figure Steve put out was 1%.

[Subscreet]

I agree with you, it is too simple. Every time somebody mentions the lightworker/darkworker dichotomy I always think of that scene in Donny Darko and laugh to myself. It's easy to oversimplify things when you're a member of the privileged bourgeois, but the world isn't so simple.

YouTube - Fear vs. Love

[Asmoday]

Thanks for posting that scene -- I forgot how much I loved it.

That was precisely my objection.

[Angela Leeds]

I'm puzzled by why it's assumed that someone allegedly dedicated toward "the good of the group" is somehow associated with "light" while someone dedicated to what's good for oneself is associated somehow with darkness. How could what is genuinely in one's best interest ever be truly dark or in conflict with what is good for humanity? At the highest level, they must always be one & the same. By the same token, there are many beings on the planet who are disconnected from elevated consciousness and truly illuminated thought who also are very "global"-minded. Simply by taking your own truth and universalizing it and judging that others must live by it (assuming that it is "for the good of the whole") is a dark-working state. Think of the Inquisition and every other form of fanaticism.

Have I missed some un-clarified dimension of this set of definitions here which everyone else has discussed, perhaps on another thread?

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Angela Leeds

Have I missed some un-clarified dimension of this set of definitions here which everyone else has discussed, perhaps on another thread?

Polarization

[Angela Leeds]

Thanks, Michael...that led me to a point in Steve's blog which resonates perfectly with my own understanding of light/dark and polarization...his mention that a darkworker chooses to polarize to the energy of fear. That is how I would define "darkworker" within this polarity.

But what does it have to do with group/ self, humanity/the individual? These archetypes each can be experienced through the polarity of light or dark, love or fear. There's nothing necessarily inherently "light" about a global purpose any more than there is about an individualized purpose.

Or is that actually a basic premise of Steve's and many here on the forum, that an individualized purpose somehow inherently involves polarizing with fear? And by "individualized" I don't mean "separated", I mean an expression of universal qualities of love, beauty, goodness and one-ness expressed thru the indivual. Perhaps the judgment here is that nothing individualized can resonate with universal truth & love?

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Angela Leeds

But what does it have to do with group/ self, humanity/the individual? These archetypes each can be experienced through the polarity of light or dark, love or fear. There's nothing necessarily inherently "light" about a global purpose any more than there is about an individualized purpose.

For this, I can only point to what I wrote:

___Workers, on the Terms

[Angela Leeds]

Thanks, Michael.

Having read more into the subject, I guess it's a paradigm, a way of explaining the journey of enlightenment, which I don't relate to. It's interesting to see how prevalent this particular lightworker/darkworker paradigm has become, tho. Who originated it?

The polarity of Group vs Self has nothing to do with light or dark anymore than the polarities of Home vs Career, Thought vs Belief, My Money vs Our Money and any of the many other natural aspects of human experience. It's like somehow saying that Aquarius is a lightworker and Leo is a darkworker.

Enlightenment must involve an understanding encompassing the paradox of all these fields of human experience...including the shadowy inner world as well as the realm of the sublime.

I have many friends who I know would typify themselves as "Lightworkers" who are easy manipulated by people who speak of "love, peace, and global oneness" and yet cannot see nefarious intentions when they are involved. I wouldn't call that particularly enlightened. A mind that cannot perceive deceptive intent is not illuminated, even though it may feel itself to be in a happy place. That's a foolish path because it is out of balance. Being able to see only "light" isn't wisdom -- one needs to be able to recognize manifestation of darkness, otherwise there is no true discrimination to perceive what is truly "light".

In any event...interesting paradigm to explore. Thanks for your help & links, Michael.