Being and doing
DeMarco, Frank. Rita's World: A View from the Non-Physical (Kindle Location's 5170). Rainbow Ridge Books. Kindle Edition
(Q) [Charles: "I'm wrestling with 'what the person is, is right, regardless of whether what the person specifically does in any given circumstance is right or not'. I understand that no being is 'created' wrong, but from this comment it seems to indicate there is a 'right' choice. Would Rita please comment?"]
(A) Charles has the first part, which is more difficult for many people than you might suspect. Not only do people criticize what others (and they themselves) do, they often criticize what others (and they themselves) are. Perhaps they do not think of it that way, but that's the effect. When you say, "I love x" - whether friend, lover, or only someone you have read about or seen - "but I only wish he or she weren't so [whatever]" - you are, in effect, saying "that person is imperfect as is".
Well, there ae two ways of saying the same thing. Either everybody is imperfect, because everybody has the defect of their qualities, or everybody is perfect, because they are as they were created and they are living that problem as best they can. This isn't even two statements, both true, but onestatement.
As I say, Charles has that part, or seems to, by this question. Now let us look at the second part of this, thinking as we do.
A right choice? There are so many ways to examine this. Right absolutely? Right for the individual? And, if the latter, what does that mean? Right as in, best expressing the person's qualities at the moment? Or, as offering the most productive path forward (however that would be defined, and whoever would be the ones to define it)?
Given that, one way or another, all choices are taken from the view of the absolute, it still remains true that on any one pathway, only one choice is made. You don't come to a crossroads and take very fork in the road. You take one, regardless what happens in other versions of reality. And often enough the various options are, shall we say, ethically neutral. That is, taking one path or another won't affect, or won't much affect, your ongoing process of living your values. Whether you go east or west may make no difference ethically though it may make a huge difference (or may not, but may) in the future choices you will be faced with. But whether you can call a given choice "right" or not depends on where you stand relative to the person choosing.
You see? My point was that a person isas he or she was created; they doas they are moved to do, and the results of their choices can be argued, but the nature of the community that is functioning as an individual cannot.
(Q) [Charles: "Further, if everyone has a 'pole star', is that referring to a preference of choices that would be beneficial to the person in 3D, meaning some choices have better 3D results; i.e., maybe less suffering? Or, if that is misunderstood, what does Rita mean by a 'pole star'?"]
(A) When I say pole star, here, I mean the constant unvarying orientation that any 3D life cannot avoid having, consciously or (usually) not. What you areis hugely determinative of what you believe, what you value, what you choose. That's all.