Rise of the Lightworker (Blog)

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by John Prophet

To put it simply, darkworkers have a very Machiavellian approach; sometimes brutal, but always pragmatic.

Yes, Machiavellian is a word I often think of with respect to darkworkers.

[yossarian]

impaul - for myself I don't think fighting darkworkers is necessary at all. I do think the work to do is inside work, and I also think forgiving darkworkers is important work.

You are constantly taking extremely analytical approaches to this topic and it really doesn't and won't get you anywhere. You need to ease off the pure rational analysis and let some right-brained metaphor in there. Steve is throwing out metaphors and analogies that he thinks can be useful, and you are extending them to levels which I doubt he intended them to be taken too.

Every metaphor can be pushed too far and thereby made meaningless. If this concept could be described simply and logically and be 100% internally consistent, we wouldn't have to use metaphor.

[JeromeX]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Lightworkers can become quite powerful and achieve positions of influence over others. A good example is the Dalai Lama.

How do you feel about China’s decision to systematically wipe out the Tibetan culture?

Would you consider a CIA's puppet a lightworker?

Would you consider brutal feudal theocracy and slavery system a culture that should be maintained and worshipped?

Read this article before make shallow claim:

Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

[Kingston]

This is a new direction for Steve's blogging. He has never before taken such a open stance on international politics, and framed it in his models of lightworking and consciousness. I knew he was Vegan and was not inspired by any political candidate, and he was critical of liers before. Now he has a clear stance, congratz for that! He will have government surveillance on his back pretty soon now

I think that someone is me.

[DanielBrenton]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I realize that some members just aren't aware of what it means to be a darkworker and find it preposterous that someone would choose this path intentionally. Your personal objections, however, do not prevent everyone from choosing that path.

Other people, however, are well aware that some on this planet have chosen the darkworker path intentionally, and committed darkworkers are not dissuaded by what others think of them. Ignorance is advantageous to them. Cancer cells do not advertise themselves as such.

Yes, that's exactly it. People who are darkness-centered don't give a rat's ass about those silly little things like laws, morals, and ethical considerations, and they hide their agenda because to do otherwise would undermine themselves. It seems clear to me Clinical Psychology has identified this kind of behavior -- what we are describing here fits closely with the definition of a Sociopath, which is someone who holds nothing sacred beyond his or her own interests.

Trying to make others aware of individuals who express these characteristics has, from my experience, been met with derision, because most ethical people are simply too naive -- or their world-view too narrow -- to accept the possibility that darkness-centered people exist, or the really successful darkness-centered individuals are very skilled at masking what they truly are.

[JeromeX]

What is personal development all about? Compassion or hatred? Perception or truth? Peace or conflict? Understanding or judgement? Deep or shallow? Inner-towards or out-towards? Trust or Conspiracy?

Steve, you are heading in the wrong direction. No offence, just disappointed.

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by JeromeX

Steve, you are heading in the wrong direction. No offence, just disappointed.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard that.

Oh wait... I do.

What is the wrong direction for a few people has always been the perfect/ideal direction for another group. In your case, feel free to assume I'm exercising my right to be wrong.

[Anna Conlan]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Other people, however, are well aware that some on this planet have chosen the darkworker path intentionally, and committed darkworkers are not dissuaded by what others think of them. Ignorance is advantageous to them. Cancer cells do not advertise themselves as such.

Despite the objections from the choir, cancer cells can and do arise in the body of humanity.

I agree.

Darkworker souls are very good at pretending to be Lightworkers. It makes them even more effective.

The best approach a Darkworker can take to steal your energy and create negativity in you is by making you think he’s just like you – a Lightworker.
The most effective Darkworkers are the ones who claim to be Lightworkers and claim to be against evil – just look at George Bush.

'I'm against evil, evil is everywhere, everyone had better panic and be scared but the government will try to protect you' - what a wonderful distraction. Darkworkers excel at creating fear in people because it gives them control.

And another reason Darkworkers can be so successful is because Lightworkers like to think the best of people. Unless they see it first hand, they just assume that everyone is aligned with positive energies, like they are.

And of course there are people who seem to be dealing in negative energies and who are in fact positive souls getting bogged down in negativity but doing the best they can.

If anyone’s interested in reading more about Darkworker souls, there are some good articles about this subject on Andrea Hess’s blog:

Empowered Soul Blog » Who are Negative Souls?

Empowered Soul Blog » What is Negative Energy?

[PrimaryErn]

The polarity challenge is to consciously decide whether or not to be a cancer cell. When you're ignorant of the decision, you end up taking many cancerous actions by default because you aren't aware of what you're doing.

So....by consciously choosing to be a darkworker, and being aware of what I'm doing, I won't be taking cancerous actions by default? I will be journeying down a path of enlightenment - albeit a different path then lightworkers?

That doesn't match the "kill the darkworkers" attitude I seem to get from the new polarity postings - and from the mob-response here about the evil darkworkers.

You say that you encourage people to be darkworkers because people have free will and a right to exercise it? That makes no sense to me.

Look - I know I must not be getting it and I don't seem to be getting a direct answer, so I'll ask more directly:

Put bluntly - in a previous post you said being a consciously-choosing-to-be-darkworker was a different path but still a path to enlightenment. That you encouraged people to follow the path - not that you encouraged people to 'exercise their free will even if it is a destrucitve choice'. You specifically said: "I also want to encourage those who choose to pursue the darkworker path because as long as they keep growing in awareness, all of us will ultimately benefit from it. "

Now you are saying being a darkworker is bad, and darkworkers are bad for society as a whole. And I don't see how you can reconcile those two beliefs.

So I guess my question would be:

Do you still encourage people to pursue the darkworker path, because as long as they follow that path and keep growing all of us will ultimately benefit?
and
What sort of ultimate benefits will humanity get that you envisioned in the original post?

For the mob of readers yelling for the death/cessation of darkworkers (and pinning the 'darkworker' label on every cause they personally dislike), if a darkworkers approached you, and you were about to...let's say 'convince' them to stop being a darkworker, and they said "but Steve said HE encouraged me to pursue this path because all of YOU" -and then he points at you - " would ultimately BENEFIT FROM IT", how would you respond? Would you still demand they cease being a darkworker?

I'm sorry - there's a logical inconsistancy here and it's like trying to digest a piece of metal - I'm choking on it and its not going down.

I truly wonder if its just terminology. The original definition of light and dark worker were more like "self- and other-worker". Now the definition is "self-which-leads-to-evil worker and others-which-leads-to-good worker". And everyone is like, "Ooohh, i want the second one, I'm a good guy!" Where originally it was "well, I'm not sure what path I should take. Hmm. Both lead to enlightenment, according to Steve, so maybe its just a question of commiting to a style and discipline, since neither path is evil".

[Fullcrum]

Interesting Steve...has learning about American politics made you more aware of things going on in the world?

[PrimaryErn]

And this one - am I the only who remembers:

Some religious teachings embrace the lightworker path while shunning the darkworker path, which at the very least is incredibly misguided. That approach only lowers our awareness. Labeling parts of ourselves as bad or evil isn’t helpful. In every one of us, there is the potential for both polarities. What we label “evil” is merely a temporary condition while we’re growing through the experience of duality, and when we resist that phase, we merely prolong it. However, if we can commit to one of these paths and take it far enough, accepting even the seemingly negative experiences as they come, we eventually reach the other side where both paths converge.

this doesn't sound like the path of a cancer cell, vampire, etc.

[Anna Conlan]

Originally Posted by impaul99

So the point of "lightworkers" rising up and forming a gang is to go out and wipe out the "darkworker" gang that's been rising up? Meanwhile the "normal" people that are undecided in the middle go on about their lives unaware of what's going on?

Sounds like an "X-Men" movie to me. Do the lightworkers get cool constumes to wear with like a big L on the front of their chest?

If you’re someone who understands how negative energy operates, you’re never going to advocate “fighting” negative energy or Darkworkers.

When you’re focusing on something, whether it’s something you want or something you don’t want, you’re adding to its power – energy flows where attention goes (as I think they put it in the Secret)

It’s more constructive to acknowledge that negative energy exists in the world and to understand how it works – it has no power source except you. That way, you can choose not to engage with it if you come across it and not add to its power.

[Sam988]

Originally Posted by DanielBrenton

Yes, that's exactly it. People who are darkness-centered don't give a rat's ass about those silly little things like laws, morals, and ethical considerations, and they hide their agenda because to do otherwise would undermine themselves. It seems clear to me Clinical Psychology has identified this kind of behavior -- what we are describing here fits closely with the definition of a Sociopath, which is someone who holds nothing sacred beyond his or her own interests.

Trying to make others aware of individuals who express these characteristics has, from my experience, been met with derision, because most ethical people are simply too naive -- or their world-view too narrow -- to accept the possibility that darkness-centered people exist, or the really successful darkness-centered individuals are very skilled at masking what they truly are.

Sociopaths and darkworkers don't have so much in common.

For starters, sociopaths don't measure the consequences of their acts, leading them to do things by sheer impulse. A DW would never do that, DWs calculate their actions beforehand and analyze the possible good and bad consequences and then decide if doing whatever they're planning to do is worth it or not.

Sociopaths can't control themselves and even the lesser provocation could send them into a rage attack, losing their reason.


Sociopaths are the ones who are the more prone to murder; a DW would almost never do that, only under some special circumstances. He realizes that the chances of there being negative outcomes are just too big for him to take the risk, and there is also the risk that he may feel guilty about it later. DWs do have feelings too, just so you know it; although to a lesser extent, and they can control it very well.



There are also many other striking differences between DWs and sociopaths, but i think you get the picture. The main difference between both is that DWs are healthy mentally (their brains, anatomically, are no different than, say, a lightworker's brain), they just chose to have different moral values, while sociopaths didn't choose anything; they were mostly born with some brain problems (the environment also helps of course, but sociopaths do have genetic predispositions to become that).

[BrnLng]

I think this post was about dark/light-work syndrome, maybe?

For myself, I do care about namings and conventions as they benefit my though-patterns and make them clear to understand and modify.

[DanielBrenton]

Originally Posted by Sam988

Sociopaths and darkworkers don't have so much in common.

For starters, sociopaths don't measure the consequences of their acts, leading them to do things by sheer impulse. A DW would never do that, DWs calculate their actions beforehand and analyze the possible good and bad consequences and then decide if doing whatever they're planning to do is worth it or not.

I will concede that the psychiatric community has outpaced the definition I used for a sociopath.

The term is now "Antisocial Personality Disorder" and I've linked here to the definition of that on MedTerms.com. This is a very different thing than a DarkWorker, as I'm understanding it.

And I will concede that the term "sociopath" is a loaded one emotionally.

I suspect that many of those who suffer from Antisocial Personality Disorder do in fact understand the ramifications of their actions. Their objective is naturally what benefit they derive from it. Having been victimized by one such individual, I will tell you this is true.

To go back to the definition, "someone who holds nothing sacred beyond his or her own interests," this still fits what's being called a "DarkWorker."

I don't think it take a lot of imagination to understand that at least in portions of a DarkWorker's evolution, ethical structures are actually obstacles to their ends.

I don't have a lot of respect for that, and I'm entitled to be wrong.

(If Steve had a nickel for every time I've been told I'm going in the wrong direction, he'd be twice as rich.)

[John Prophet]

I don't think it take a lot of imagination to understand that at least in portions of a DarkWorker's evolution, ethical structures are actually obstacles to their ends.

I think that a lot of people get too hung up on this idea of morality and ethics (keeping in mind that these are ultimately subjective concepts anyway). Individuals, who are too concerned with right and wrong, often fail to see that there is a big difference between immorality and amorality. They seem to think that being “good” is all that matters and that not being good = being bad. In my mind, right and wrong are abstract concepts, created by human idealists and all that really matters is doing what works (keeping in mind that anything which is ultimately self destructive, doesn’t work).

My motto is “practicality over principle”. If you live by this, than you should be OK regardless of what “evil” you might do. Of course, if Steve’s Metaphor about the body and cells is true, that that would mean that my standards of practicality might be flawed. This leads to a whole other set of debatable issues; but it is a debate about what is practical and should not be concerned with what is ethical or moral.


There is no sin except stupidity
- Oscar Wilde

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Anna Conlan

If you’re someone who understands how negative energy operates, you’re never going to advocate “fighting” negative energy or Darkworkers.

When you’re focusing on something, whether it’s something you want or something you don’t want, you’re adding to its power – energy flows where attention goes (as I think they put it in the Secret)

It’s more constructive to acknowledge that negative energy exists in the world and to understand how it works – it has no power source except you. That way, you can choose not to engage with it if you come across it and not add to its power.

Absolutely. I agree.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by yossarian

impaul - for myself I don't think fighting darkworkers is necessary at all. I do think the work to do is inside work, and I also think forgiving darkworkers is important work.

I agree. I don't thinking fighting anyone is the answer. I believe the only "competition" or "fighting" that's really important is between yourself and your ego.

You are constantly taking extremely analytical approaches to this topic and it really doesn't and won't get you anywhere. You need to ease off the pure rational analysis and let some right-brained metaphor in there. Steve is throwing out metaphors and analogies that he thinks can be useful, and you are extending them to levels which I doubt he intended them to be taken too.

You're probably right and I'm just trying to understand what Steve is trying to communicate. I have a lot of respect for Steve and most of what he talks about makes total sense to me, but when it comes to all this Darkworker / Lightworker "stuff" it's like he totally loses me.

Not because I don't understand the words that he is saying or the metaphors that he's presenting, but because this whole Lightworker/Darkworker thing seems totally inconsistent with everything he's said up until now.

It's kind of like if Deepak Chopra and Eckhart Tolle all of a sudden decided to work together with Donald Trump to build the worlds largest Casino in Vegas. I have a lot of respect for Chopra and Tolle, but if they made that move it would seem out of character for me. It would be ok for Trump to open a casino, as that's his thing.

Anyway, whatever... maybe I should just listen to a spiritual coach of mine and ignore Steve's Darkworker / Lightworker thing.




Every metaphor can be pushed too far and thereby made meaningless. If this concept could be described simply and logically and be 100% internally consistent, we wouldn't have to use metaphor.[/QUOTE]

[JeromeX]

Wow, seems I need to see a psychiatrist to help me to figure out this darkworker and lightworker thing.

Here is another nagative energy that will make your positive energy stronger:

Tell me why?

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by John Prophet

I think that a lot of people get too hung up on this idea of morality and ethics (keeping in mind that these are ultimately subjective concepts anyway). Individuals, who are too concerned with right and wrong, often fail to see that there is a big difference between immorality and amorality. They seem to think that being “good” is all that matters and that not being good = being bad. In my mind, right and wrong are abstract concepts, created by human idealists and all that really matters is doing what works (keeping in mind that anything which is ultimately self destructive, doesn’t work).

My motto is “practicality over principle”. If you live by this, than you should be OK regardless of what “evil” you might do. Of course, if Steve’s Metaphor about the body and cells is true, that that would mean that my standards of practicality might be flawed. This leads to a whole other set of debatable issues; but it is a debate about what is practical and should not be concerned with what is ethical or moral.

"Morality" is not merely a word, nor is "evil", ok? Call these concepts "sh*t" if you want, but it looks like you and some others are just trying to convince yourselves there is no such thing as wrong or evil in order to justify what you want and how you want to get it and for some reason you are in denial about how it really is and don't just want to say it like it is, however that may be.

The fact of the matter is, as an example, if you lie to someone who you know loves you and you use and take advantage of their love to tell some lie and play on their compassion in order that they will give you money, or if you continuously make your girlfriend or wife believe that you love her, while all the while you are screwing someone else, or maybe you are doing it with your best friend's wife (the sky is the limit), you can refrain from labeling that act if you want, but figure out that not labeling it doesn't change what you've done to others or make it right.

It is what it is and what determines that it is WRONG is that it HURTS other people--it doesn't hurt you, but it hurts everyone else! That is why we got these words "evil" and "right and wrong" and "morality". A rose smells just as sweet by any other name, and immoral behavior still hurts whether you decide to label it or not! You can't take away the word and think that that will take away the nasty reality and consequences of your acts and that you never do anything wrong. Words and labels don't matter! It bloody hurts someone else and that is all the matters.

And morality is not subjective either. For example, there are laws in all countries dictating certain moral behaviors and most crimes are similar in all countries. It is universal knowledge among humans that you hurt your spouse and you betray their trust when you sleep with someone else and that is wrong. In fact, most of the morality a person possesses probably comes from them being able to think and feel and put themselves in the position of others and say "God, I would hate if someone did that to me, so I'm not going to do that to anyone else."

The saying used to be "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" but people, thinking they were witty and clever, began to replace it with "Do unto others before they do unto you."

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

"Morality" is not merely a word, nor is "evil", ok? [...]

The fact of the matter is, as an example, [...] if you continuously make your girlfriend or wife believe that you love her, while all the while you are screwing someone else, or maybe you are doing it with your best friend's wife (the sky is the limit), you can refrain from labeling that act if you want, but figure out that not labeling it doesn't change what you've done to others or make it right.

Yes, lets use that example. What if we're polyamorous? What if my wife has no problem with it? Why is it intrinsically evil to sleep with someone other than your wife/girlfriend? Isn't that subjective?

Originally Posted by Bitsy

The saying used to be "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

Personally I dislike that saying. What if the others want something vastly different than you would in that situation? For example, you might want (eg.) to be "rescued" from ever engaging in homosexual behaviours, but that doesn't mean that they do. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" assumes you share a worldview with them.

"Evil" is very subjective. Sure there's generally common agreement on the big issues like murder, but what is considered "evil" fractures dramatically below that level. Even at that level, IIRC, the Aztecs considered it evil to not engage in human sacrifice - it would bring the world to an end after all!

[inverse Paranoid]

What happens when someone is miraculously healed from a supposedly incurable form of cancer? Do you really think it's simply a case of the body being able to manufacture a high enough quantity of white blood cells? Or is there something more to it?

By simply writing off darkworkers we'd be giving up on a generation of extremely capable individuals who for whatever reason were swayed towards the "dark-side".

If you corner a group of darkworkers, and offer them no way out, you can expect that they will do everything in their power to defend themselves, and probably succeed in taking a few lightworkers down with them. But, what if you had them "beat" and rather than swooping in for the "kill" you offered them a hand?

Perhaps they would go right back to their darkworker ways, but the humility of defeat coupled with lightworker magnanimity would be fertile grounds for planting the seeds of change. They would have to wonder why they were spared. Those seeds of confusion may soon grow into seeds of doubt. And even if those seeds were never to blossom in these particular darkworkers, they would carry it everywhere they went, and it would soon permeate darkworker waters.

You say that darkworkers don't lead, they control. But isn't controlling the much more difficult task? One that takes a tremendous amount of ambition to even think about attempting?

What would happen if we could recognize darkworkers as masterful leaders just waiting to be hatched? If we could see their blind ambition as conscious inspiration just waiting to be transmuted?

If this is a civil war that's brewing then I can't help but wonder if there's a possibility for win-win. What would have happened if Lincoln could have convinced Lee to fight for the North? How much sooner would the civil war have ended? How many more lives saved?

Will the Arlington of our future be a museum... or another cemetery? It's for the conscious to decide.

[Bitsy]

These things are very simple. The saying is not "Worry about and adjust your behavior according to what you think everyone else wants done unto them because if they follow the Golden Rule they will do that unto you". It is very simply "Treat others as you want them to treat you" or as you would want to be treated. It's that plain and simple, period, not a word more and not a word less. It's is not rocket science, so it ought to be easy to understand for everyone. You don't worry about others or what they are doing, you be responsible for you and that's all, don't harm others or do things that will harm them. It's really not an intellectual exercise to understand the "Golden Rule."

As for the adultery and polyamory example, it's also very simple--if you are betraying their trust, it is wrong. If you are weaving a web of lies to protect your interests with you wife, or wives, or anyone else, whatever the case may be, it's wrong. These dark things are wrong imo and they bring a very sinister feeling that I don't want ever want to feel firsthand.

The fact is, once upon a time, humans were born with a wonderful thing called a conscience. The conscience was the gauge that told us when we were doing something wrong in each given situation. Nobody had to ask or think "right or wrong" and then try to provide evidence in defense of the very existence of the concept of right and wrong or debate about the "right or wrongness" of some form of adultery in one of an infinite number of partnership situations. You knew if something was wrong when you were considering doing it, you knew when you were about to give in to some indulgence or desire if it would hurt someone close to you and you didn't even have to call it wrong, it was just a feeling and you knew you shouldn't do it, even if it was something very, very small.

[Akashic_Librarian]

Oh my gosh, are we having a bash the Darkworker week haha!

I think people are getting WAY too emotional over something they barely understand.

Darkworkers arn't evil, Lightworkers arn't good.

Think about it...

A lightworker does whats best for the "body" by giving and providing value, however the Lightworker also takes and recieves so as to support itself.

A Darkworker takes and recieves, and does whats best for the "cell" but that doesn't mean he commits "evil" I go to the gym three or four times a week so that I look good. Is that selfish, I would say so yeah.

But when I look good, I feel good and when I feel good and I can transmit that onto people around me, who in turn act nicer towards me.

Therefore would you call me a Lightworker or a Darkworker?

[Bitsy]

For the record, I am not talking about "lightworkers" or "darkworkers". A year later, I still don't like or get those labels. One of the greatest contradictions and drawbacks on this website is the promotion of the ideal of "oneness" and then the reality is that everyone just spends all their time judging, analyzing, labeling, pigeonholing and separating.

Anyway, I agree with what someone wrote earlier--nobody is all one way or all the other. People are mixed and, while posters keep making up scenarios of this or that and then asking "does that mean I'm a darkworker/lightworker?" no one can ever judge that, or whether a person is acting from a good place of love or one that's not good, because the core of any individual act of a person lies in his intention and motive for doing it, and who can possibly know that but the person himself? Don't ask Steve or posters in a thread what your own intention is, if you don't know it yourself, figure it out, no one else knows it.

[Akashic_Librarian]

Bitsy, if you where talking about me at all, I was asking the question rhetorically to point out the logical fallacy many posters seem to believe about what a Dark/Lightworker is.

And I also agree with you, its a personal intention, a personal label, so don't call ME bad or evil for something I choose to do. Because thats likesaying Homosexuals are evil because they stop children being born!

[JeromeX]

My psychiatrist was able to reveal that my terrible oppressed past has embedded a awful trauma in my subconciousness:

When We were called Sick man of Asia, We were called The Peril.
When We are billed to be the next Superpower, We are called The threat.
　　
When We were closed our doors, You smuggled Drugs to Open Markets.
When We Embrace Freed Trade, You blame us for Taking away your jobs.
　　
When We were falling apart, You marched in your troops and wanted your "fair share".
When We were putting the broken pieces together again, "Free Tibet" you screamed, "it was an invasion!"
　　
So, We Tried Communism, You hated us for being Communists
When We embrace Capitalism, You hate us for being Capitalist.
　　
When We have a Billion People, you said we were destroying the planet.
When We are tried limited our numbers, you said It was human rights abuse.

When We were Poor, You think we are dogs.
When We Loan you cash, You blame us for your debts.
　　
When We build our industries, You called us Polluters.
When we sell you goods, You blame us for global warming.
　　
When We buy oil, You called that exploitation and Genocide.
When You fight for oil, You called that Liberation.
　　
When We were lost in Chaos and rampage, You wanted Rules of Law for us.
When We uphold law and order against Violence, You called that Violating Human Rights.
　　
When We were silent, You said you want us to have Free Speech.
When We were silent no more, You say we were Brainwashed-Xenophoics.
　　
Why do you hate us so much? We asked.
"No," You Answered, "We don't hate You."
　　
We don't Hate You either,
But Do you understand us?
　　
"Of course We do," You said,
"We have FOX, CNN and BBCs..."
　　
What do you really want from us?
Think Hard first, then Answer...
　　
Because you only get so many chances,
Enough is Enough, Enough Hypocrisy for this sacred darkworker labeling.
　　
We want One World, One Dream, And Peace On Earth.
- This Big Blue Earth is Big Enough for all of Us

The therapy went very well. Now I am feeling really good by knowing that every time I get blamed, I will simply get stronger.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

These things are very simple.

You're right, it's not rocket science. It's a combination of philosophy, theology, history, philology, psychology and sociology that is required to truly understand its intended meaning and application.

Keith is absolutely right when he says that you must share a worldview for that particular quote to be applicable. It refers to the fact that we should all share a common view towards the good of man, and be working towards it together. Therefore every individual in a community that shares the common goal is no more important than his role in helping to achieve that. Everybody should be treated with respect because everybody has a part to play in achieving the common good. In that sense everybody is truly equal and nobody can be more successful than the success of the whole group.

The common goal is in fact twofold. It is to practically assist in the shared task of developing a prosperous and peaceful society whilst also worshipping the divine. It is a double standard of virtues, and one that we rejected in adopting our modern liberalist society. Liberalism does not recognise an objective morality and that is why we are all free to make up our own minds. Society is no longer a team, rather a collection of isoltaed individuals. Jesus' quotes can only be understood in terms of the culture which he was communicating with. To try to understand them as categorical imperatives is a mistake because that takes them entirely out of the context they were meant for.

Anyway, in this rejected classical scheme of thought, which Jesus was a part of, anybody who doesn't work towards the common good has simultaneously rejected themselves from God's kingdom in the religious sense AND the literal sense because they have separated themselves from their community.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

Bitsy, if you where talking about me at all, I was asking the question rhetorically to point out the logical fallacy many posters seem to believe about what a Dark/Lightworker is.

Ok. Well, it was yours and every other post asking similar questions, now and last year when this all started. I think a better point to make would be that neither I nor anyone else can judge the quality of your true intention, why you want to look good or why you go to the gym, or why you do more significant things either. I mean, someone can appear externally to be bad, like someone who is anti-social, but not be bad and vice-versa. People misjudge and misinterpret others as fluently as they breathe, so to sit here and say "this person is evil/this person is a darkworker" "this person is good/this person is a lightworker" (whatever those are) etc. and maybe you have never even met that person, let alone spoken with or lived with them seems really arrogant and presumptuous and it doesn't seem like a past-time that should be practiced on a PD website. Being judgmental is one of the things I hate most about myself and here it is on a PD site being encouraged .

I think people are too complicated to be 100% one way or 100% the other way. Even in people I don't like who have hurt me extremely and always will and who show little thought of or for others, like my brother who I know quite well, I can't judge, as I observe his behavior and reactions and how he lives, that he is 100% "evil". In most cases, the individual himself doesn't know his true intention for doing something (that's my observation).

[PrimaryErn]

If you identify as a lightworker, who enjoys working for the good of others, and you do things for people and it makes you feel good inside - that's awesome. You identify with the greater collective good and fulfilling that path resonates within you.

uh oh - look at the language. 'You' enjoy it? it makes 'you' feel 'good'? it resonates within 'you'?

uh oh! Motivated by self-feelings, self-dreams, self-paths....doesn't that make you a darkworker?

Aiiiiiiiii!

In all seriousness: I think everybody does everything that they do because of a need to satisfy a personal agenda. If you are selfless because you want to (get into heaven/be recognized as an advanced soul/feel good about yourself/impress the hot new-age chick) that is a selfish act. Its an act to make you feel good. So don't talk about darkworkers being selfish and selfishness being evil, because everyone acts out of self interest, and it isn't either good or evil.

I'd further attest that unless you are engaging in behavior that is painful (and you don't enjoy suffering on some spiritual level), you aren't really being selfless, and even then you'd have to wonder. A mother starving herself to feed her children is selfless as long as she's doing it for no reason other than love of her children - if she's doing it becuse society would condemn her, or Jesus would condemn her, or because it just makes her feel bad to eat, she's doing it for a selfish reason.