+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: More Positive but Less Harvestable (/showthread.php?tid=2868)
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-20-2011
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: @bring4th_Monica
you seem to have strong views.
On certain subjects, yes. I am always open to other viewpoints. But I do think certain principles are fundamental to the STO path, as outlined by Ra.
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: I have only one question. Do you like fishsticks?
I've been a vegetarian for 29 of the past 30 years, so fishsticks aren't part of my reality. Before I was a vegetarian, I never cared for fish. I am curious why you would ask such an odd question...?
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: If you don't want to answer, I understand. Unity never answered me either. I'm okay with that. It's all good.
Why did you ask unity and me this question?
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: @tenet
Everything that Ra says is literally true.
I don't think Ra would agree with that.
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: However, We have a way of putting it into our own context to suit our viewpoint. In other words, to distort it.
We all do that. But that doesn't mean it didn't have some degree of distortion to begin with. Ra went to great lengths to minimize distortion, but I don't think they intended for us to blindly accept every word as literally true, as though a religion.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-20-2011
Hi, seejay21. Thanks for rejoining the thread!
(07-20-2011, 04:49 AM)seejay21 Wrote: My interjection into this thread is to discourage from seeking answers about specific people, and thier orientation. It is the opposite of what it is that will help seeing the other-self as yourself, as the Creator.
I concur that this line of questioning does not appear to lead to any truly useful information within the material. On the other hand, had it not been for Patton entering into this thread, we perhaps would have missed out on an opportunity for greater understanding. At least, I know that to be true for myself.
seejay21 Wrote:@tenet Everything that Ra says is literally true. However, We have a way of putting it into our own context to suit our viewpoint. In other words, to distort it.
I am not convinced that the Ra communication is infallible in its truthfulness. However, I would concur that it is our own projections, including that of the Questioner and the Channeler, which lead to distortions of the ideas presented therein.
I offered this quote for meditation upon the STS/STO concept, and would also like to introduce it here:
Ra Wrote:This study is as difficult as the one which we have described to you, but there are those with the perseverance to pursue the study just as you desire to pursue the difficult path of seeking to know in order to serve. The distortion lies in the effect that those who seek to serve the self are seen by the Law of One as precisely the same as those who seek to serve others, for are all not one? To serve yourself and to serve others is a dual method of saying the same thing, if you can understand the essence of the Law of One.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - seejay21 - 07-20-2011
@bring4th_Monica
The "fishsticks" question (actually a joke) is a South Park reference. Probably not one of your favorite shows.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/224088/do-you-like-fish-sticks
I reference it because it is a play on words. Someone can say something over and over, and the other still won't "get it". In the end, it's a joke. It reminds me of the illusion we live in.
Here's the scene about confusion on "getting it" and how the struggle seperates us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn4TrtK4JaI
The scene may be a bit violent in your opinion. I think it is straight to the point though.
@Tenet
In reading the LOO, I haven't found anything that I can say "isn't true". It falls into two categories for me. Either true, or I don't know about that subject. Some of it is far reaching. Don even had his doubts. For what it is worth, it's the closest thing I've seen that explains what is "going on" than any other text. It's pretty cool actually.
BTW, Kanye West ends up finding his way home to his bliss in the end of the south park episode. He makes it, loves and forgives, and becomes who he is.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - zenmaster - 07-20-2011
(07-20-2011, 10:06 AM)kycahi Wrote: They explained why newbie 6D STSers soon leave that path for STO: 5D grows in wisdom until achieving enough to become 6D.Considering the extremely long duration of 6D, where did you get the inference of 'soon'?
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - kycahi - 07-21-2011
(07-20-2011, 07:58 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(07-20-2011, 10:06 AM)kycahi Wrote: They explained why newbie 6D STSers soon leave that path for STO: 5D grows in wisdom until achieving enough to become 6D.Considering the extremely long duration of 6D, where did you get the inference of 'soon'?
Quote:for after fifth-density graduation wisdom is available but must be matched with an equal amount of love. This love/light is very, very difficult to achieve in unity when following the negative path and during the earlier part of the sixth-density, society complexes of the negative orientation will choose to release the potential and leap into the sixth-density positive.
I could have written "relatively soon," I suppose.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-21-2011
(07-20-2011, 04:02 PM)seejay21 Wrote: In reading the LOO, I haven't found anything that I can say "isn't true". It falls into two categories for me. Either true, or I don't know about that subject. Some of it is far reaching. Don even had his doubts. For what it is worth, it's the closest thing I've seen that explains what is "going on" than any other text. It's pretty cool actually.
It is definitely "pretty cool". For me it was the Law of One that led me to seek for other materials equally far reaching in their scope. Notable are the Urantia Book, the Keys of Enoch, and A Course in Miracles (among others).
Let's take Urantia for example. To me, this was clearly written at a level of mind that far surpasses my own. Much of it is highly congruent with the Law of One books. Yet not all of the historical information offered lines up.
Moreover, according to the view offered in Urantia, transmigration of the soul (reincarnation, metempsychosis) and astrology are false doctrines. Now this is in direct contradiction to Ra. So either there is some "higher truth" available here for us to discern, or one of those sources is a direct attempt at manipulation and promoting false information.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that Urantia is a "better" source than Ra, only a different source. Hopefully this will avoid a potential derailment here.
Throw in some of these other works, and it becomes easier to see that, indeed, Ra is simply one "humble messenger" among many...
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-21-2011
It is only a direct manipulation if we were to accept that both come from higher being that live way out in space, beyond anything we can touch.
If we give it that, then that is what it has. We could also view each as a manifestation of Minds, and therefore congruency is irrelevant as both represent how Mind contructs the 'beyond' and its connection to the 'beyond' (or Higher realms)
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-21-2011
(07-21-2011, 09:21 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Moreover, according to the view offered in Urantia, transmigration of the soul (reincarnation, metempsychosis) and astrology are false doctrines. Now this is in direct contradiction to Ra. So either there is some "higher truth" available here for us to discern, or one of those sources is a direct attempt at manipulation and promoting false information.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that Urantia is a "better" source than Ra, only a different source. Hopefully this will avoid a potential derailment here.
Urantia was not approved by Council, according to Ra.
Reincarnation is so basic, that I have a hard time finding much value in any channeled book claiming that it's a 'false doctrine.' One would expect to find that in a Christian-flavored channeled work. Is Urantia Christian-flavored? If so, then I'd say it's the channel's own biases coloring the info. Either that, or intentional disinfo from negative entities, for the purpose of confusing seekers.
That's not to say that there isn't some good info there, but personally I find it too tedious to wade thru a book of that size, to find a few gems, when there is purer info available. It would be like trying to wade thru the Bible! It's too inefficient to have to disregard so much obviously negative info.
To avoid derailment, a discussion about Urantia can be continued in the thread devoted to Urantia.
(07-21-2011, 09:21 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Throw in some of these other works, and it becomes easier to see that, indeed, Ra is simply one "humble messenger" among many...
Indeed there is a smorgasboard of other sources to choose from, undoubtedly so that we may exercise our free will and discernment.
My own discernment tells me that none of the other sources that I've found, come close to the high level of info as well as lack of distortion I see in the Ra material. I personally wouldn't put a source that denies reincarnation in the same league.
(Just my opinion, for what it's worth.)
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-21-2011
I mean, reconciling illusional 'facts' is incongruent with letting go of the material constructs, is it no?
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-21-2011
(07-21-2011, 03:03 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: I mean, reconciling illusional 'facts' is incongruent with letting go of the material constructs, is it no?
I don't "get" this. Please clarify. And please check your pm.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-21-2011
LOL. I love you, Monica. I really do.
What I mean here is that the objective of spiritual material is to connect our physical existence with the mind/spirit existence. This objective includes a teaching of how to transform our idea that what we see makes up our reality to reaching the idea that our reality exists well beyond our material world.
This becomes our Co creating ability to create. The meaning of what I said is that to attempt to justify the reality of the beyond by reconciling the creations of that beyond (different material manifestations) is a step away from the beyond to focus on the material which brings the person back to concentration of the material world instead of sealing out the beyond which is the focus of the Spiritual Teachings themselves. In other words, you aren't tranforming in either teachings fashion if you are still trying to look at the manifestations they speak of. The Mind can create what it wants.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-21-2011
(07-21-2011, 03:01 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: It is only a direct manipulation if we were to accept that both come from higher being that live way out in space, beyond anything we can touch.
If we give it that, then that is what it has. We could also view each as a manifestation of Minds, and therefore congruency is irrelevant as both represent how Mind contructs the 'beyond' and its connection to the 'beyond' (or Higher realms)
Right-o!
Ra is just Ra being Ra. Just because Ra is a nonphysical being greeting us from sixth-density does NOT mean that they are infallible, or that it would be wise to believe in their words when they run contrary to our own inner knowing. Remember, Ra is teach/learning, too! And every good teacher wants their student to eventually surpass them in understanding, right?
At least it would appear that Q'uo took a lesson from Ra and now includes a precautionary statement before each transmission reminding the reader/listener to discard any information that is not deemed congruent with their own inner wisdom.
Quote:Ra: I am Ra. The path of our learning is graven in the present moment. There is no history, as we understand your concept. Picture, if you will, a circle of being. We know the alpha and omega as infinite intelligence. The circle never ceases. It is present. The densities we have traversed at various points in the circle correspond to the characteristics of cycles: first, the cycle of awareness; second, the cycle of growth; third, the cycle of self-awareness; fourth, the cycle of love or understanding; fifth, the cycle of light or wisdom; sixth, the cycle of light/love, love/light or unity; seventh, the gateway cycle; eighth, the octave which moves into a mystery we do not plumb.
(07-21-2011, 03:03 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: My own discernment tells me that none of the other sources that I've found, come close to the high level of info as well as lack of distortion I see in the Ra material. I personally wouldn't put a source that denies reincarnation in the same league.
Agreed. Although I have raised the subject several times in this and other threads as regards to different ways in which the Ra material could have acquired a tendency toward certain misinterpretations, or distortions, in the reader's mind. And it is in the careful examination of other works outside of the Law of One, that I have come to see more clearly how the Ra contact could have been improved upon.
Specifically, I have discussed the ritual use of the Prayer of St. Francis and the Bible before the contact and how that may have confined the transmission to a "narrow band" of information. I talked also about certain distortions already present in the Channeler's and Questioner's mind and how that can affect the information received. I've pointed out several examples where Ra appeared to have been desirous of offering a more expanded and in-depth discourse on the Law of One, but repeatedly got shut down and derailed into talking about "earth changes" and "prophecies". I've also mentioned several times how I believe the persistent use of the words "should" and "wrong" in the query limited the information that came out in the response.
It would appear that I am one of the very few who has found these lines of investigation to be interesting and/or useful. I have observed many folks to repeatedly pass over these comments, and to continue on with the thread as if it those comments were never made.
Lastly, a few folks seem to be very perturbed and even angry that I "dare" to challenge their particular interpretation of certain concepts presented in the material.There is a certain level of knowledge that is available by simply reading the words of Ra. There is another level of knowledge that is available by comparing how the choice of words in the response is congruent with the choice of words in the query. There is another level of knowledge that is available by taking the Ra contact in the context of the human beings who were involved in the process, and where those individuals stand today with respect to certain issues, namely personal finances, health, and sexual relationships.
And I am sure there are many, many other levels, angles, and perspectives of which I am not yet aware. If we always read the material with the same set of glasses on, then we are drastically limiting the amount of information and wisdom that can be extracted from it.
Oh well, at least it was an attempt:
Ra Wrote:The attempt, if it reaches one, reaches all.
(Just my opinion, for what it's worth.)
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-21-2011
(07-21-2011, 04:24 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Specifically, I have discussed the ritual use of the Prayer of St. Francis and the Bible before the contact and how that may have confined the transmission to a "narrow band" of information. I talked also about certain distortions already present in the Channeler's and Questioner's mind and how that can affect the information received. I've pointed out several examples where Ra appeared to have been desirous of offering a more expanded and in-depth discourse on the Law of One, but repeatedly got shut down and derailed into talking about "earth changes" and "prophecies". I've also mentioned several times how I believe the persistent use of the words "should" and "wrong" in the query limited the information that came out in the response.
Agreed. But it is what it is.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - BrownEye - 07-22-2011
(07-21-2011, 04:24 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: There is a certain level of knowledge that is available by simply reading the words of Ra. There is another level of knowledge that is available by comparing how the choice of words in the response is congruent with the choice of words in the query. There is another level of knowledge that is available by taking the Ra contact in the context of the human beings who were involved in the process, and where those individuals stand today with respect to certain issues, namely personal finances, health, and sexual relationships.
And I am sure there are many, many other levels, angles, and perspectives of which I am not yet aware. If we always read the material with the same set of glasses on, then we are drastically limiting the amount of information and wisdom that can be extracted from it.
I tend to focus on the answer rather than the question. I peeked at book 5 and noticed that some of the commentary was not really understanding what was given. As if interpreted wrong. Now don't ask me what I read because it has been a couple years, but I fully remember the irritation at the idea of disconnect. I think maybe Tenet has hit on this and wonders why nobody takes notice.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-22-2011
(07-21-2011, 11:43 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: Agreed. But it is what it is.
Is it? I would suggest this forum is an extension of the contact. A living conversation built around the material, and the very place where one might look to see what kind of impact the Law of One had on the formative stages of humanity's SMC.
Seeing as how there is a certain inertia present the human mind toward:
(A) singling out a particular perspective of spiritual truth as the "One True Way",
(B) doggedly forcing that view onto others, through violence, law, proselytizing, or other means,
© systematically censoring or repressing alternative views deemed as heretical,
(D) attaching other ideas (riders) onto spiritual revelations that were not originally present, and
(E) putting one's "faith" in a charismatic leader, guru, master, avatar, savior, etc. rather than trusting one's own inner wisdom,
I believe it is critically important to do everything we can to reduce the potential for these particular distortions to get projected into 4D. If we do not master some of the fundamental lessons that history is attempting to teach us here in 3D, we will be doomed to recapitulate them in 4D, and again in 5D.
Remember, the "war" is still going on in 4D and 5D. It is only the particularly distasteful aspect of KILLING one another that is not present.
(07-22-2011, 02:44 AM)Pickle Wrote: I tend to focus on the answer rather than the question. I peeked at book 5 and noticed that some of the commentary was not really understanding what was given. As if interpreted wrong. Now don't ask me what I read because it has been a couple years, but I fully remember the irritation at the idea of disconnect. I think maybe Tenet has hit on this and wonders why nobody takes notice.
Yes. It has only been six weeks since the material in Book V was restored to its original place. I happen to think this is highly significant. I believe that the Book V material is a key to unlocking a great mystery and carries important lessons as to how to put an end to this Ra/Yahweh conflict for good. But the key is not in the replies... it has more to do with the queries... and with the reason why L/L decided to censor this information in the first place.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-22-2011
(07-22-2011, 10:02 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Yes. It has only been six weeks since the material in Book V was restored to its original place.
I didn't remember that Don was channeling Ra at first. How was that possible, since Don wasn't in a trance, and the whole point about Carla being in a trance was to facilitate the narrow band contact? How could Ra just pop into Don so easily like that? Did Carla & Jim explain this in Book V? Where in Book V was this discussed?
(07-22-2011, 10:02 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I happen to think this is highly significant. I believe that the Book V material is a key to unlocking a great mystery and carries important lessons as to how to put an end to this Ra/Yahweh conflict for good. But the key is not in the replies... it has more to do with the queries... and with the reason why L/L decided to censor this information in the first place.
I'm intrigued. Please elaborate!
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-22-2011
(07-22-2011, 10:27 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I didn't remember that Don was channeling Ra at first. How was that possible, since Don wasn't in a trance, and the whole point about Carla being in a trance was to facilitate the narrow band contact? How could Ra just pop into Don so easily like that? Did Carla & Jim explain this in Book V? Where in Book V was this discussed?
Great questions! I don't have all the answers, but I feel they are definitely worth pursuing.
Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I'm intrigued. Please elaborate!
I have been!
Might I suggest you start here. Or, alternatively, keep reading this post. The choice is yours.Quote:Trinity: I know why you're here, Neo. I know what you've been doing … why you hardly sleep, why you live alone, and why night after night, you sit by your computer. You're looking for him. I know because I was once looking for the same thing. And when he found me, he told me I wasn't really looking for him. I was looking for an answer. It's the question that drives us, Neo. It's the question that brought you here. You know the question, just as I did.
Neo: What is the Matrix?
Trinity: The answer is out there, Neo, and it's looking for you, and it will find you if you want it to.
Trinity: Please Neo, you have to trust me.
Neo: Why?
Trinity: Because you have been down there Neo, you know that road, you know exactly where it ends. And I know that's not where you want to be.
Morpheus: I imagine that right now, you're feeling a bit like Alice. Hm? Tumbling down the rabbit hole?
Neo: You could say that.
Morpheus: I see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, that's not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?
Neo: No.
Morpheus: Why not?
Neo: Because I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my life.
Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?
Neo: The Matrix.
Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?
Neo: Yes.
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember: all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more.
Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Business men, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it. Were you listening to me, Neo, or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?
This just in:
1950s Human ETs Prepare Us for Golden Age -- Videos, Documents!
PLEASE NOTE: My linking to an external source is not necessarily an endorsement thereof, nor a statement that I agree with everything written therein.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-22-2011
(07-22-2011, 10:02 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Remember, the "war" is still going on in 4D and 5D. It is only the particularly distasteful aspect of KILLING one another that is not present.
Yes. It seems to be that the "war" is completely fought by lobbying the entities in the 'Choice phase' as though each battle is simply an attempt to sway the 'Choice makers (3D entities)'.
Why in the world would a 5D entity care anything about bothering us in 3D?
I like Ocean's take. They seem to be as messed up as we are.
I also kinda think that it is more mental imagery for the human mind. The story that a misuse of wisdom allows a "5D entity" to 'attack' and it manifests in the physical as a spider bite.... (I can't explain what I'm thinking)
Ra, the 6D person, speaks through a person encouraged by a group. There are real world mind configurations associated with the entire 'contact'. If the archetypical mind is a real thing, then it will manifest in very similar ways across the spectrum of minds. This would be why religions are all very similar, and also why they become corrupt in similar ways.
There are minds that are more capable and there are 'teams' that will lift a certain 'mind' to higher achievement. To illustrate, I have a body like the rest of mankind, I digest, sleep, run, jump. Michael Jordan has a body too, but his is different, and add to that stimuli, surroundings, and team support; and you will see that is body has achieved more/different than mine. The point being that he and I proceed through the bodily existence in very similar ways even though his expression achieved more. Likewise, L/L Research is a 'mind' that is making 'contact' with the 'Mind' that we all share. This is why we "resonate" and why we can make all these connections between the Ra material and ancient religions. Certainly I am capable of making such contact myself, much in the same way I can dribble a basketball and shoot some hoops. In the same way my existence didn't come together in all its possibilities to become a great basketball player, I don't see my existence achieving the likes of the Ra 'contact.' I'm not trying to present self pity, and neither am I trying to bow down to the ones that achieved the Ra contact.
I think I'm just trying to say that this research and development is a real look at what the 'mind' is and Tenet Nosce is doing a great job at researching the points that make the actual material not separate from a very example of the Mind as the material is itself.
(07-22-2011, 10:56 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: PLEASE NOTE: My linking to an external source is not necessarily an endorsement thereof, nor a statement that I agree with everything written therein.
This should be understood whenEVER we receive links from ANYone. ( I have a certain individual in my life that will go on a rampage from a link I send. I can't send him stuff anymore because of it...)
......
LOL, now that I have clicked the link it is my assumption that you actually endorse laughing at the article in full disbelief. (my distortions) Perhaps you should revise your disclaimer if you intend to agree with a tiny bit of it. L O L !!!!
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - βαθμιαίος - 07-22-2011
(07-22-2011, 10:02 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Yes. It has only been six weeks since the material in Book V was restored to its original place. I happen to think this is highly significant. I believe that the Book V material is a key to unlocking a great mystery and carries important lessons as to how to put an end to this Ra/Yahweh conflict for good. But the key is not in the replies... it has more to do with the queries... and with the reason why L/L decided to censor this information in the first place.
That's not quite correct. Six weeks ago the difference function was added to lawofone.info so that it's easy to see where the Book V material belongs in each session. The Book V material has been reintegrated into the version at lawofone.info for a couple of years now. Book V was originally published in 1998.
(07-22-2011, 10:27 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I didn't remember that Don was channeling Ra at first. How was that possible, since Don wasn't in a trance, and the whole point about Carla being in a trance was to facilitate the narrow band contact? How could Ra just pop into Don so easily like that? Did Carla & Jim explain this in Book V? Where in Book V was this discussed?
I haven't read recent posts on this thread, so I'm not sure what this is referring to, but Don didn't channel Ra. In the first session Ra attempted to speak through him, but he resisted the contact and, as far as I know, they didn't try again.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-23-2011
(07-22-2011, 12:29 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: That's not quite correct. Six weeks ago the difference function was added to lawofone.info so that it's easy to see where the Book V material belongs in each session. The Book V material has been reintegrated into the version at lawofone.info for a couple of years now. Book V was originally published in 1998.
Thanks for the correction! Yes, I recall when Book V came out in 1998. I was referring to the difference function.
Quote:(07-22-2011, 10:27 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I didn't remember that Don was channeling Ra at first. How was that possible, since Don wasn't in a trance, and the whole point about Carla being in a trance was to facilitate the narrow band contact? How could Ra just pop into Don so easily like that? Did Carla & Jim explain this in Book V? Where in Book V was this discussed?
[quote=βαθμιαίος]I haven't read recent posts on this thread, so I'm not sure what this is referring to, but Don didn't channel Ra. In the first session Ra attempted to speak through him, but he resisted the contact and, as far as I know, they didn't try again.
Yes, that was my understanding as well. I thought perhaps Bring4th_Monica had some inside info or something! What I was referring to was the decision by L/L to originally censor the information. I understand the reason why, however being able to read the sessions in their original context more clearly illustrates the point I previously made about how using limiting words like "should" and "wrong" in the query limits the response in ways that may not be immediately apparent.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - βαθμιαίος - 07-23-2011
I'm not sure censor accurately describes L/L Research's motivation. I think it was more that when they originally published books 1-4 they didn't think their personal dramas were interesting or relevant to what they hoped was a philosophical investigation into the nature of reality.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Oceania - 07-23-2011
(07-14-2011, 12:48 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I added to the last part of my reply , if you didn't notice.
(07-14-2011, 12:31 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: It had nothing to do with being vegan.
Do you know for a fact that is true? So the newspapers, courts, doctors, etc. are all lying? Misinformed, maybe?
Gosh, I don't know we don't seem to be getting anywhere on this particular point. I feel like you know what I am talking about, but for some reason we are not connecting on this.
veganism + zealotry = harm
NOT
veganism = harm
Veganism is still part of the equation. YES... you could of course substitute any number of other things in there because the zealotry part of the equation carries much more weight.
guns + zealotry = harm
religion + zealotry = harm
But this is not true for all things. potatoes + zealotry DO NOT = harm because potatoes do not carry the same potential for harm within them.
Zealotry = An ethical dogma based on an absolutist interpretation of a philosophical principle on conduct.
Therefore, using the Law of One in an attempt to derive a clear-cut approach to ethical decision making = recipe for disaster... just like unity100 is cautioning against in his/her posts.
Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Those people were obviously insane.
YES! YES! YES! So what can we do to help prevent against an otherwise reasonable idea, like veganism, from being twisted in the mind of an insane person, or zealot? Any ideas?
potatos = harm
potatos = vodka
potatos = potato bazooka bullet
potatos = makes you fat anyone???
potatos = eat only potatos and turn into an irishman, oh wait that's a good one.
potatos + zealotry = cult of potatos being worshipped at the expense of human life
potatos + nutjobs = giant Tom Cruise statues carved out of mashed potatos filling up the world and drowning the children
seriously. anything can be used for good or bad, veganism is a neutral thing like anything else when people are SANE and have common sense.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-23-2011
(07-23-2011, 03:22 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: I'm not sure censor accurately describes L/L Research's motivation. I think it was more that when they originally published books 1-4 they didn't think their personal dramas were interesting or relevant to what they hoped was a philosophical investigation into the nature of reality.Whatever word you would like to use is fine with me. The point is that I find it very interesting and relevant. Just like in quantum physics, one cannot separate the observer from the observed. While I appreciate the effort toward "objectivity", I would assert that one cannot separate the channeler from the channeled, or the questioner as the case may be.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Tenet Nosce - 07-24-2011
(07-22-2011, 11:39 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: Yes. It seems to be that the "war" is completely fought by lobbying the entities in the 'Choice phase' as though each battle is simply an attempt to sway the 'Choice makers (3D entities)'.
Right. Now how can an entity make a true choice if they aren't presented with all the pertinent information?
Quote:I think I'm just trying to say that this research and development is a real look at what the 'mind' is and Tenet Nosce is doing a great job at researching the points that make the actual material not separate from a very example of the Mind as the material is itself.
Thanks! I am happy to hear that I have been of service.
Quote:LOL, now that I have clicked the link it is my assumption that you actually endorse laughing at the article in full disbelief. (my distortions) Perhaps you should revise your disclaimer if you intend to agree with a tiny bit of it. L O L !!!!
I already had. I went back and underlined necessarily.
David Wilcock actually did some extremely stellar research into a scientific basis for spiritual growth and human potential back in the day. This research (in my opinion) got derailed into a "mission" to be a harbinger of ET disclosure.
Consider this quote I dug up on a Google search for "don elkins suicide":
David Wilcock Wrote:Any researcher trying to draw comparisons between my life and those of the Law of One team, be advised... I was the first person to live in Don Elkins' room after he committed suicide, nearly 20 years later. I pick up ALL the energies off of the areas I sleep in whether I want to or not. I slept on the "Ra Bed" that the original Law of One readings were done off of for the first month I was there. All the frozen suicide thoughtforms in Don's room greeted me very strongly - the second or third night I slept in there I had a terrifying dream where gov. spooks shot my head off and I was in my astral body, trying to move my arms to feel if I still had a head. I didn't even take Don's original decorations off the wall and repaint to claim the room as my own until a month into the process.
... and here is an interesting take on the whole situation framed in a query to the Cassiopean contact:
Quote:Q: I have been having a dialogue with a fellow on the net in the last week or so who is very well versed in the Ra Material. He sent me a large chunk of volume 5 of the Ra books, which was material that had not been released earlier. It seems that during the times that Don Elkins was asking some questions about different conspiracies and the nature of the 4th density STS manipulations and some other rather grim subjects, there was some sort of judgment made by this group, or members of this group, that such subjects were not appropriate lines of questioning for an STO channel. They were, apparently, considered to be a "focusing on negative aspects," therefore they were not of "love and light." Such questions and directions of questions were, therefore, discouraged or agreed by this group to be not desirable to pursue. Don Elkins DID, however, commit suicide. Can you tell us why?
A: Suicide is a chosen pathway for the purpose of close realization of shutting off the noise.
Q: I would like to understand. Here, these folks had this marvelous contact with Ra...
A: Contact with Ra does not preclude the possibility of attack.
Q: Why did Ra not convey to him the information necessary to understand that he was under attack, and what kind of attack it was, and how to deal with it?
A: The questions were not asked.
Q: Why were the questions not asked that would have protected him?
A: "Love and Light" focus.
Q: So, because they were so focused on the love and light aspects...
A: There is no positivity without negativity. There is always negativity present, whether acknowledged or not.
Q: So, you are saying that if it is not acknowledged, placed on the table, so to speak, that it sort of "bites you" no matter what? That, in some way it will manifest, and if a person goes to an extreme in terms of love and light, the negativity will come in the back door?
A: Close.
Now this is very close to what I have conceived in my own mind. The interesting thing is... I just came across this quote for the first time several days ago. Quite the "coincidence", no?
Anyhow, as near as I can tell, from both reading and personal experience, when one opens the gateway to intelligent infinity, they receive both a positive and a negative greeting. Of course, not too many negatives are going to come right out and state their true intentions, but instead disguise themselves as a positive contact.
Typically this involves a suggestion of a particular "life mission" (Assigned by... whom, exactly?) and some sort of ego massaging in order to get a person to accept that they are a master, guru, avatar, or some other "special" category of being that is here to "serve" others.
If the neophyte is not sufficiently trained in wise discernment, this is very risky business. Oh, and by the way, it is entirely possible to simply acknowledge both the greetings and then kindly request that they step aside so that you may pass.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-24-2011
Close. Pretty close. "bites you", indeed. serendipity.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - unity100 - 07-24-2011
(07-23-2011, 07:32 PM)Oceania Wrote:(07-14-2011, 12:48 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I added to the last part of my reply , if you didn't notice.
(07-14-2011, 12:31 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: It had nothing to do with being vegan.
Do you know for a fact that is true? So the newspapers, courts, doctors, etc. are all lying? Misinformed, maybe?
Gosh, I don't know we don't seem to be getting anywhere on this particular point. I feel like you know what I am talking about, but for some reason we are not connecting on this.
veganism + zealotry = harm
NOT
veganism = harm
Veganism is still part of the equation. YES... you could of course substitute any number of other things in there because the zealotry part of the equation carries much more weight.
guns + zealotry = harm
religion + zealotry = harm
But this is not true for all things. potatoes + zealotry DO NOT = harm because potatoes do not carry the same potential for harm within them.
Zealotry = An ethical dogma based on an absolutist interpretation of a philosophical principle on conduct.
Therefore, using the Law of One in an attempt to derive a clear-cut approach to ethical decision making = recipe for disaster... just like unity100 is cautioning against in his/her posts.
Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Those people were obviously insane.
YES! YES! YES! So what can we do to help prevent against an otherwise reasonable idea, like veganism, from being twisted in the mind of an insane person, or zealot? Any ideas?
potatos = harm
potatos = vodka
potatos = potato bazooka bullet
potatos = makes you fat anyone???
potatos = eat only potatos and turn into an irishman, oh wait that's a good one.
potatos + zealotry = cult of potatos being worshipped at the expense of human life
potatos + nutjobs = giant Tom Cruise statues carved out of mashed potatos filling up the world and drowning the children
seriously. anything can be used for good or bad, veganism is a neutral thing like anything else when people are SANE and have common sense.
quite efficient explanation.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - Monica - 07-24-2011
(07-24-2011, 12:12 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Right. Now how can an entity make a true choice if they aren't presented with all the pertinent information?
This density is the density of Choice. And it was intentionally veiled, thus drastically reducing 'pertinent info'.
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - 3DMonkey - 07-24-2011
Doesn't it seem that the other densities' exist with nothing better to do than to dip into 3D?
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - kycahi - 07-24-2011
(07-24-2011, 04:26 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: Doesn't it seem that the other densities' exist with nothing better to do than to dip into 3D?
Maybe we are their "guilty pleasure."
RE: More Positive but Less Harvestable - zenmaster - 07-24-2011
Ironically, with the illusion included, this is the only place where it is "real". "The axis upon which the creation turns".