+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Spiritual Development & Metaphysical Matters (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Transition to Fourth Density (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Thread: 3rd density time and precession (/showthread.php?tid=100)
3rd density time and precession - sos - 01-14-2009
This post is going to seem a little off the wall, but these are things I wonder about. It seems to me that the 3rd density cycle of three 25000 year segments on earth is tied to the earth's precession which completes a cycle every 26000 years. The final of the three 25000 year cycles of 3rd density is completing on 12/21/2012, so it is assumed that this is the official time of the harvest. But as I thought about this and that Ra referred to this 75000 year period as applying to all 3rd density planets, I have to wonder how this is so. Not only years are different on all planets, but precessional time periods is as well. For example, both Mars and Venus have different length years than earth, with the Venus year being shorter and the Mars year being about twice as long. Also, each planet has much different precessional lengths as well - so if 3rd density is tied to precessional cycles, then how does this square with Mars and Venus, both of which had 3rd density life? In other words, a year on earth is not a year on another planet, and 75000 years on earth is not 75000 years on another planet. So why the emphasis on 75000 years as a standard? If it's tied to the precessional cycle of a planet, why would that be significant since there is such a wide variation? The only thing I can figure is that maybe this changes on a planet from density to density. Is this making any sense? Any thoughts on this somewhat lunatic rambling?
RE: 3rd density time and precession - kensanwa - 01-14-2009
Hey SOS,
The only thing I can really come up with is what you already said, which is that precessional cycles change according to the corresponding density. Even that is just a shot in the dark though. One other passing thought is about time itself. If you keep in mind that "time" is just a way to measure "change" (or vice versa), you might get something like:
1 precessional cycle(earth)= ABC amount of change= 25000 years
1 precessional cycle(venus)= ABC amount of change= ??? years
That way maybe you could say that the same amount of change on Earth and Venus locks the time to being equavalent as well, even if on earth it is 25000 years and venus it is, say 90000 years. Dont know if that helps or makes even the slightest amount of sense. Just another shot in the dark I guess.
Be well,
Kensanwa
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Monica - 01-15-2009
(01-14-2009, 09:52 PM)kensanwa Wrote: The only thing I can really come up with is what you already said, which is that precessional cycles change according to the corresponding density. Even that is just a shot in the dark though. One other passing thought is about time itself. If you keep in mind that "time" is just a way to measure "change" (or vice versa), you might get something like:
1 precessional cycle(earth)= ABC amount of change= 25000 years
1 precessional cycle(venus)= ABC amount of change= ??? years
That way maybe you could say that the same amount of change on Earth and Venus locks the time to being equavalent as well, even if on earth it is 25000 years and venus it is, say 90000 years. Dont know if that helps or makes even the slightest amount of sense. Just another shot in the dark I guess.
Thanks, kensanwa, for saying exactly what I was thinking but had not yet figured out how to articulate it!
I think Ra was referring to the substance of the cycle (amount of change) and that the equivalent to our 75,000 years was the same elsewhere.
I think Ra was referring to that substance, that equivalency, not the number of years as measured in Earth time.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - βαθμιαίος - 01-16-2009
Good question. I've often wondered whether Ra's 25000 years is supposed to be 26000 years and is yet another example of their not being good with numbers. Also, why three cycles to make up third density? It all seems so arbitrary.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Ali Quadir - 01-16-2009
The precession is simply the wobble of the earth as it rotates around its axis, it is caused by the sun and the moons gravity fields... So there is indeed absolutely no reason for this cycle to be the same on different planets.
Ra only states that this cycle is easiest to measure using the precession. So if I assume Ra is correct then there must be a causal link between the two even if the two are not the same.
I'm very hesitant to speculate about this link. It's very easy to fool yourself with a clever idea that ends up missing the point.
I had the idea that it had something to do with the orbit around the galactic central sun. Then I tried to calculate the time period of one degree of rotation relative to the central sun. And it gave no logical numbers at all, just weird fractions.
I too have the feeling that it's all arbitrary.
So to summarize: If anyone has an actual clue I'd too sure would like to hear from them.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - airwaves - 01-25-2009
"Questioner: The way that I understand the process of evolution is that our planetary population has a certain amount of time to progress. This is generally divided into three 25,000-year cycles. At the end of 75,000 years the planet progresses itself. What caused this situation to come about with the preciseness of the years in each cycle?
Ra: I am Ra. Visualize, if you will, the particular energy which, outward flowing and inward coagulating, formed the tiny realm of the creation governed by your Council of Saturn. Continue seeing the rhythm of this process. The living flow creates a rhythm which is as inevitable as one of your timepieces. Each of your planetary entities began the first cycle when the energy nexus was able in that environment to support such mind/body experiences. Thus, each of your planetary entities is on a different cyclical schedule as you might call it. The timing of these cycles is a measurement equal to a portion of intelligent energy.
This intelligent energy offers a type of clock. The cycles move as precisely as a clock strikes your hour. Thus, the gateway from intelligent energy to intelligent infinity opens regardless of circumstance on the striking of the hour."
This helps a little bit.
I also encourage you to read this.
http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=332&Itemid=30
It answered a lot of my questions, or at least helped me put it together some of the material.
"Questioner: I am assuming that it is not necessary for an individual to understand the Law of One to go from the third to the fourth density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.
Questioner: That is a very important point. I used the wrong word. What I meant to say was that I believed that it was not necessary for an entity to be consciously aware of the Law of One to go from the third to the fourth density.
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct."
This is a little disturbing but just reading all of the Law of One material gives me such a positive feeling that it cant be bad.
It certainly increases my natural tendency towards altruism. I am starting to wonder if I am maybe a wanderer. I seem to fit the description perfectly in an almost creepy way, although I feel I should have awakened already.
What ever is the truth is inconsequential and does not pertain to this thread.
Love and peace my friends.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Monica - 01-28-2009
(01-25-2009, 10:53 PM)airwaves Wrote: This is a little disturbing but just reading all of the Law of One material gives me such a positive feeling that it cant be bad.
It certainly increases my natural tendency towards altruism. I am starting to wonder if I am maybe a wanderer. I seem to fit the description perfectly in an almost creepy way, although I feel I should have awakened already.
What is it you find disturbing? Is it the part about 'not understanding' being essential to harvestability?
I interpret that to mean that The Choice must be made from behind the Veil.
This leads to the implication that, once a Wanderer has awakened, their Choice has already been made. I would surmise that they probably won't awaken until after they've made their Choice...at which time, glimmers of understanding won't interfere with their harvestability.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Quantum - 01-30-2009
(01-25-2009, 10:53 PM)airwaves Wrote: I also encourage you to read this.---------------------------------------------------------------------Dear Dear airwaves,
http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=332&Itemid=30
It answered a lot of my questions, or at least helped me put it together some of the material.
As recommended and invited, I took the liberty of reading the gentleman's post that you recommended above, i.e. as regards the interpretations of the writer's sentiments with respect to what I consider to be "his very personal and perhaps biased interpretation" with respect to what "he believes" are Ra's sentiments concerning 2012. Many of us are very familiar with this author's writings, and arguably he has done a great deal to promote the Law of One extensively. However, that notwithstanding, he seems adamantly committed to his interpretations of the Ra Material with respect to 2012 as "an end of life coming" to life as we know it, and this as being fixed, static, immovable, immutable, and solidified. I would offer that his opening dialog begins "The time has come, because I'm getting tired of repeating myself, to be quite honest!" and then in fact does so at great length. His position, simply stated, is that life as we know it will end. He references Ra extensively, and even adeptly, so as to support 'his theory' , and states unequivocally that it is Ra's. This is an "all or nothing position" and he stakes everything, including life itself, on this one single fact, allowing no alternative.
In order to accept a truth as an inevitable bit of logic towards its conclusion(s), one must first and foremost accept the premise(s) stated as fact before one may then follow the logic to conclude it's correctness. Argue the premise, and the logic falls apart.
I question the premise(s) of the post (far too long to list) but invite all to read, as did you originally above. Several arguments to the contrary come to mind as a result:
(1): Let us assume what Ra said was in fact true, as per the sentiments stated. If so, may things not change? If the answer is yes, as it always must be, then release this interpretation from it's "stricture" (a Ra term), as perhaps as the energy befitting those possibilities, in those vortices, at that time interval.
(2) Other readings, most notably Quo, suggest that the energies may have evolved since, and as such, that perhaps the changes may be far less severe, and thus far more gradual, if not forgiving.
(a) Let us remember that Quo states that "They" are part of the Ra group. One would have to argue against this in order to argue against this possibility.
(b) Carla Ruckert, who channeled Ra, is now channeling Quo. The source seems impeccable, and as such has withstood the test of time. Clearly we are all in agreement to at least this premise, as offered by the proof that we are here to discuss and challenge ourselves to higher ground as regards the LOO (Law of One)?
© The writer of your reference has openly challenged the Quo material (as being less than factual), which in a sense questions Carla's channeling abilities, or source, or at the very least the accuracy of her connection to the Quo source.
(d) If we question Carla as regards Quo, then why stop there and not question Carla as regards Ra? Perhaps she is as good at it, or has gotten better at it, verses worse?
(e) But the author then also goes on to state that he would have us believe he too now channels Ra these days. I can not dispute this, nor would I, but I would question why we would take this position as more true when we are presumably asked to believe that he too channels Ra(?) but that Carla who channeled Ra originally, and is now channeling Quo, would be less accurate(?) ,this while his current Ra channeling's are more accurate(?), and against the backdrop of the fact that Carla presumably can not contact the Ra group specifically any longer as the result of Don's inability to participate?
(f) Finally, we know at great length of Carla's and Don's and Jim's very strict requirements as regards the Ra channeling sessions, as much as we do to their great body of work. We know very little as to the author's stringent requirements of his Ra channeling sessions, or much of his body of work as regards the Ra channeling's specifically. This is not to impugn his channeling abilities, but only to draw a comparative analysis of each's respective works verses their outcomes, and to question, given his questions or challenges against Quo, verses his assertion he channels Ra.
(3) The Ra readings specifically expressed the 100-700 year possibility as to the length of time of transition as well, and seems to leave as much open in the same vein that did Quo in the Ruckert session as regards the length of time of transition.
Quote:Ra: This intelligent energy offers a type of clock. The cycles move as precisely as a clock strikes your hour. Thus, the gateway from intelligent energy to intelligent infinity opens regardless of circumstance on the striking of the hour."
Quote:Ra: At this particular nexus the possibility/probability vortices indicate somewhere between 100 and 700 of your years as transition period. This cannot be accurate due to the volatility of your peoples at this space/time.
Even Ra states this can not be accurate. Let us than allow that we can not know with accuracy then.
Quote:From the author of the referenced site airwaves offers as regards Ra's quote above: Here is the one and ONLY 'gradualist' quote in the entire Law of One series. You just read the ONE quote that has created the WHOLE PROBLEM everyone's arguing about......As we're about to see, this 100-700 year period does not start counting as of the time of the Law of One material… it begins in 1936. Trip out on this for a minute. We entered into a whole different structure of reality as we know it, beginning in 1936.
1936 plus 700 = 2636?
As for Quo suggesting 300 years, it lies somewhere between what Ra inferred as roughly 2300? My point being, do we transition at the beginning of the transition (2012), or at the end of some several hundred years of the transition?
The clock of intelligent energy indeed must strike if we accept the Ra teachings. It may very well even be a spontaneous event. But does this require the interpretation as "an end of life scenario" somewhere at the beginning of this transition/juncture? Life goes on, in one form or another in any event, but perhaps not as "an end" in one instant, but more as a change sustaining life in one instant to offer transition to all?
Finally, I love the the sign off signature of each post that one participant uses with every posted message that is a Ra quote:
Ra (3:65): "Could your planet polarize towards harmony in one fine, strong ,moment of inspiration? Yes, my friends. It is not probable; but it is ever possible."
This alone resounds with hope, love, and possibility, and is as a result far removed from anything locked, fixed, static, unmoving, or immutable as can be discerned. In this one sentiment alone by Ra all is layed to rest, not as regards life ending as we know it, but as regards possibilities. Possibilities are not fixed by their very definition
Lastly:
Quote:"Questioner: I am assuming that it is not necessary for an individual to understand the Law of One to go from the third to the fourth density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.
Questioner: That is a very important point. I used the wrong word. What I meant to say was that I believed that it was not necessary for an entity to be consciously aware of the Law of One to go from the third to the fourth density.
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct."
I don't understand, I don't know, but I do understand and do know that the only ones with the knowledge of knowing know they don't know.
Confused and loving it,
Q
RE: 3rd density time and precession - βαθμιαίος - 01-30-2009
The linked article is inaccurate when it says there is only one gradualist quote concerning the harvest in the Law of One series. There is at least one other one, from session 63:
Quote:Questioner: I will make this statement and have you correct me. What we have is, as our planet is spiraled by the spiraling action of the entire major galaxy and our planetary system spirals into the new position, the fourth-density vibrations becoming more and more pronounced. These atomic core vibrations begin to create, more and more completely, the fourth-density sphere and the fourth-density bodily complexes for inhabitation of that sphere. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is partially correct. To be corrected is the concept of the creation of green-ray density bodily complexes. This creation will be gradual and will take place beginning with your third-density type of physical vehicle and, through the means of bisexual reproduction, become by evolutionary processes, the fourth-density body complexes.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Monica - 01-30-2009
Wow, Quantum, very well said!
For Q'uo's update on this issue, please see
Sessions in Focus > 2006.01.01 End of 3D - No Fear
Q'uo's words in this session directly address this question.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Quantum - 01-30-2009
(01-30-2009, 12:17 AM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: The linked article is inaccurate when it says there is only one gradualist quote concerning the harvest in the Law of One series. There is at least one other one, from session 63:
Quote:Questioner: I will make this statement and have you correct me. What we have is, as our planet is spiraled by the spiraling action of the entire major galaxy and our planetary system spirals into the new position, the fourth-density vibrations becoming more and more pronounced. These atomic core vibrations begin to create, more and more completely, the fourth-density sphere and the fourth-density bodily complexes for inhabitation of that sphere. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is partially correct. To be corrected is the concept of the creation of green-ray density bodily complexes. This creation will be gradual and will take place beginning with your third-density type of physical vehicle and, through the means of bisexual reproduction, become by evolutionary processes, the fourth-density body complexes.
Thank you for supporting the sentiment and thread. Excellent point made. I am quite confident that there are perhaps in fact many other statements made by Ra, either directly, or that may be inferred, such as this one you offer, that leave open the possibilities for a "sustained life position", and towards that which has been coined the "gradualist theory." I would ask, as I did above, and would continue to encourage all students of the LOO towards a more positive perspective and search of themselves to ask, when does this transition culminate(?), at the beginning (2012?), the middle(?), or the end?
Why not lighten the burden by hoping for the best for all, and believe that we have given ourselves time?
Q
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Quantum - 02-01-2009
(01-14-2009, 01:01 PM)sos Wrote: This post is going to seem a little off the wall, but these are things I wonder about. It seems to me that the 3rd density cycle of three 25000 year segments on earth is tied to the earth's precession which completes a cycle every 26000 years. The final of the three 25000 year cycles of 3rd density is completing on 12/21/2012, so it is assumed that this is the official time of the harvest.
Dear SOS,
If allowed a longer post than normal, perhaps this may assist slightly, and take another direction to your question as well:
Dictionary.com definition of equinox: The earlier occurrence of each successive equinox in each successive sidereal year is due to the slow retrograde motion of the equinoctial points along the ecliptic, caused by the precession of the earth's axis of rotation. A complete precession of the equinoxes requires about 25,000 years.
There are twelve signs in the Zodiac (astrology) represented to this day as the twelve constellations (astronomy). Each year the sun passes entirely around the one zodiac constellation, and returns to the point from which it started, called the vernal equinox. However each year it falls just a little short of making the complete circle of the heavens in the allotted period of time. As a result, it crosses the equator just a little behind the spot in the same zodiacal sign where it crossed the previous year. Given each sign of the zodiac (twelve) consists of thirty degrees, and as the sun loses about one degree every seventy two years, it regresses through one entire constellation (or sign) in approximately 2,160 years, and through the entire zodiac (twelve) in more or less exactly 25,920 years...but whose counting when rounding off? ....Said another way:
1. 12 signs x 2,160 years = 25,960 years (Ra presumably also rounded off at 25,000 years...maybe tapping into dictionary.com before it even was - lol). It's important that we not stumble on pin-point numbers and math, less we seek the detail of the brush stroke while missing the picture, painting, and message.
2. 25,960 years equals one revolution of our sun around the central sun called a Solar year
3. Three revolutions x 25,960 = 77,760 years (Ra presumably rounds off again at 75,000 years)
4. The sun rises and sets in each constellation for approximately 2,160 years, until regressing to the next constellation for the same approx 2,160 years, etc, for all twelve constellations = 25,000-ish years.
This means the course of about 25,000 years constitutes one Great Solar Year, the time required for our Sun to revolve once around it's sun called the "Great Sun or Central Sun" - i.e. the middle of the Galaxy: Milky Way, around which all other suns in this galaxy, approx 250 billion revolve. Each one of the twelve constellations (based on Zodiac Signs) occupies a position at the vernal equinox for nearly 2,000 (2,160 to be specific) years, yielding then to the previous sign.
For nearly the past 2,000 years the sun has crossed the equator at the vernal equinox in the constellation of Pisces (the Two Fishes). For the 2,160 years before that it crossed through the constellation of Aries (the Ram). Prior to that the vernal equinox was in the sign of Taurus (the Bull). Going now forward: 2000 years after Pisces (now ending), the sun will rise and cross in the vernal equinox of Aquarius in approx 2012. As the song goes: "This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius, where Peace and Love shall guide the planets.."
Among the ancients the sun was always symbolized by the figure and nature of the constellation through which it passed at that that time in the vernal equinox ( i.e Taurus the Bull = during the time of planting, etc.). Translating this to an earthly experience from astrology to astronomy to physical reality and history looks something like this: Moses comes down Mount Sinai with the 10 Commandments, is upset to see his people worshiping a golden bull calf, shatters the stone tablets and instructs his people to kill each other in order to purify themselves. Most Biblical scholars would attribute this temper tantrum to the fact that the Israelites were worshiping a false idol, or something to that effect. The reality is that the golden bull is Taurus the Bull (the past age), and Moses was representing the New Age coming of Aries the Ram as the next age coming. The Ram (Moses representing same) is replacing the Bull. This is why even today the Jews still blow the Ram's horn. Moses represents the New Age of Aries, and upon the New Age, everyone must shed the old age. Jesus in turn is the figure who ushers in the age following Aries, the Age of Pisces, the Two Fish. He too brought in a new way and manner of thinking, as much as a New Age. It was represented by bringing in The New Testament as adding from The Old Testament, and ushering in a New Religion in the process...Christianity. Fish symbolism is very abundant in the New Testament. Jesus feeds 5000 people with bread and "2 fish". The Catholic Priest to this day wears the Two Fishes on their robes during mass and services. The Christian proudly displays the two fishes on his bumper to signify he is Christian. When he begins his ministry walking along Galilee, Jesus befriends 2 fisherman, who follow him. These Christian symbols all have their origins in deeper mystical/esoteric/pagan/astrological symbolism for the Sun's Kingdom (astrology) during the Age of Pisces. Jesus' assumed birth date (Dec 25th = Winter Solstice) is essentially the start of this age. There is far far more that may be referenced to this an an entire subject matter of it's own. Suffice it to say that it may lend itself to a whole new thread if interested as relates to the Law of One.
Now, going forward once again, and from Jesus himself at Luke 22:10 when Jesus is asked by his disciples where the next passover (New Age) will be, Jesus replied: "Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you bearing a pitcher of water... follow him into the house where he entereth in."
Putting religion aside entirely, the scripture may be seen, if gazed upon correctly, not necessarily as a simple historical account, nor just a Christian Book, but in fact a manual to Higher Consciousness if allowed to be seen in a grander manner (would this not make sense...in a sense), and is by far one of the most revealing of books of all the astrological references. The man bearing a pitcher of water is Aquarius, the water-bearer who is always pictured as a man pouring out a pitcher of water. The pitcher bearer (Aquarius) represents the age after Pisces, when the Sun (God's Sun) will leave the Age of Pisces (Jesus) in the year 2012, and will go into the House of Aquarius, as Aquarius follows Pisces in the precession of the equinoxes.
As an exercise, we may now traverse forward through all of Christianity, and it's characters, and mark the Ages of each of the 2,160 years of the precession of equinoxes from Taurus, to Aries, to Pisces, to Aquarius coming in 2012, as much as we may name the figures of the 2,160 years of the equinox in each age. If going forward, Moses represented Aries for roughly 2,000 years, and Jesus represented Pisces for roughly 2,000 years, and 2012 is now Aquarius coming. Then going backwards from Moses, the question becomes which characters in Christianity represented the 2,000 years of the Taurus/Gemini/Cancer Ages in Christianity, each for 2,000 years? It lends whole new meaning as stated in scripture "In Heaven as on Earth."
RE: 3rd density time and precession - sos - 02-04-2009
This is incredible! Thanks. The key I did not have is the tie-in to the galactic orbit, which of course applies to all planetary bodies and is uniform. Very good.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - litllady - 11-29-2009
Oh boy....all of these thoughts have been something on my mind for a while now.
As much as I feel the wheel in the sky can be a clock for us I am unsure that we can have a for sure starting point and for sure restarting point.
The sun does not sit in each sign equally. Pisces for example, is a huge sign, it takes well over 2100 years to get through Pisces. This sign alone has brought much confusion....because people are thinking Aquarius is now apone us in this life time. Aquarius is in fact, still a few hundred years away (we will be on the cusp around 2500-2600). Scorpio is a very small sign, the age of Scorpio will not last even 2000 years. We also have the sun in Ophiuchus, and will have an Ophiuchus age at some point....but how often do you see Ophiuchus in a zodiac.
But how do we know when this clock started keeping count? If we are to think that Aqaurius is the new start of a clock....then we are to assume that Aquarius was the starting point of this clock 26000 yrs ago? Some think the clock started at Leo...some think it started in Virgo....many relgiions think it started at Aries. It all seems to lead in a circle!
Lately I have been looking at the Mayan calendars. It is interesting that even though they didnt talk about constellations of the sky...they did divide their long count calendar into 13 Baktuns. If we now consider there is really 13 signs in the path of the sun as well as 13 lunar months....mabey the ciricle clock is really divided into equal segments and the signs were added later, bringing much confusion. Each Baktun is 144,000 days each (hmmm does that number ring a bell?) Some say past cultures counted a year with 360 days. If this was so....360 divides nicely into 144,000 days. I cant help but to wonder if there was more to the 13 Baktuns and the 144,000 days in each Baktun.
When I use the zodiac...I see us at a half way point....we are directly across on the clock from where the cycle started. When looking for the age of Aquarius...we are still a ways off (but have time to get the world ready). If looking at the 13 Baktuns, then its possible we could be at a time of great transfiguration's.
In the end...I am clueless as which is the best for understanding our cycles of time...but it all still draws me in like trees draw in the birds from the skys.
It seems embedded in the minds of humans that there is a cycle to be found in the sky.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - transiten - 11-30-2009
Hi
Well the natural cycle of the Moon has been manipulated with... one month of course means a full cycle of the moon and there are 13 fullmoons a year. If there are 13 signs also there's absolutely something to that number. In the fairytale of sleeping beauty only 12 fairies were invited to the kings wedding because he had only 12 plates. The 13:th fairie cast a spell that the daughter of the king would sleep for hundred years.
Then the prince arrived and the thorns just opened up for him and he woke the princess with a kiss. The king represents the patriarchy and the solar year. having supressed the feminine represented by the moon, by creating 12 uneven "months". The 13.th fairie made the whole castle fall asleep symbolizing the imbalance in the society where the martian male creativity supresses the venusian caring aspect and all things that grow "naturally". The prince and the princess symbolize the restored balance between the male and female principle which must take place inside all individuals.
Friday the 13:th is said to be an unlucky day, why? Freja was the godess of fertility and 13 is the cycle of the moon and womens cycle of menstruation. Once again the supression of the female principle and controll of "nature".
In the celtic ancient culture though the highest priestess was nr. 13 among 12 priests.
Until this balance is reached, no harvest as far as i am concerned.
transiten
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Peregrinus - 11-30-2009
Women do control nature, and everything else in the world. Men just "think" they run things
RE: 3rd density time and precession - transiten - 11-30-2009
...to continue..
i just "happened" to google on John major Jenkins and "happened" to click on this link: http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/mjenkins.htm
and he just "happens" to talk about the 13 days of waxing of the moon (from the first appearing of the light) and the waning phase..enjoy!
transiten
(11-30-2009, 07:07 PM)Peregrinus Wrote: Women do control nature, and everything else in the world. Men just "think" they run things
Really! Everything that is possible to "own" is 99% owned by men.
Money talks in 3D
transiten
RE: 3rd density time and precession - litllady - 12-01-2009
Hey transiten!
I tried that link and I had a error. Could you check that again...
The moon is shining brightly here, so lovely.
My best
Lynette
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Peregrinus - 12-01-2009
Agreed. That link comes up with the following message:
OOPS !
You have linked to a page that has moved, has an incorrect link or is no longer on this site.
PLEASE GO TO THE MAIN MENU AND SEARCH AGAIN.
IF THIS WAS A LINK FROM A REFERRING WEBSITE,
PLEASE INFORM THEM TO MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGE.
Thank you!
You have linked to a page that has moved, has an incorrect link or is no longer on this site.
PLEASE GO TO THE MAIN MENU AND SEARCH AGAIN.
IF THIS WAS A LINK FROM A REFERRING WEBSITE,
PLEASE INFORM THEM TO MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGE.
Thank you!
RE: 3rd density time and precession - transiten - 12-01-2009
Goodmorning! Blue skies today!
Sloppy typing from my part but strange i didn't notice that "slip" in the end... here we go again:
www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/mjenkins.htm
Otherwise you can google it up one of the 5 that first popped up i think...
coffeetime! transiten
(12-01-2009, 03:42 AM)transiten Wrote: Goodmorning! Blue skies today!
Sloppy typing from my part but strange i didn't notice that "slip" in the end... here we go again:
www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/mjenkins.htm
Otherwise you can google it up one of the 5 that first popped up i think...
coffeetime! transiten
This i REALLY strange, i don't make any mistake while typing this and reading it now while i reply it's correct, but when it is posted on the forum the strange thing in the end happens
Ok try this, the link is correct up til "mem" in members...perhaps the link is too long to post like this in this website, that your "system" doesn't work
After the .com/ you should type "members/mjenkins.htm, see what i mean?
...maybe 13 IS an unlucky number after all
, the smileys keep popping up randomly...my IQ perhaps is not as high as the score i got on tickle test "pythagoras showing up...transiten
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Questioner - 12-01-2009
(01-14-2009, 01:01 PM)sos Wrote: But as I thought about this and that Ra referred to this 75000 year period as applying to all 3rd density planets, I have to wonder how this is so.
I don't see where Ra said that the same number of years applies to all planets. Check out this excerpt from session 9. (The Council of Saturn is elsewhere said to oversee our solar system.)
Quote:Questioner: The way that I understand the process of evolution is that our planetary population has a certain amount of time to progress. This is generally divided into three 25,000-year cycles. At the end of 75,000 years the planet progresses itself. What caused this situation to come about with the preciseness of the years in each cycle?
Ra: I am Ra. Visualize, if you will, the particular energy which, outward flowing and inward coagulating, formed the tiny realm of the creation governed by your Council of Saturn. Continue seeing the rhythm of this process. The living flow creates a rhythm which is as inevitable as one of your timepieces. Each of your planetary entities began the first cycle when the energy nexus was able in that environment to support such mind/body experiences. Thus, each of your planetary entities is on a different cyclical schedule as you might call it. The timing of these cycles is a measurement equal to a portion of intelligent energy.
This intelligent energy offers a type of clock. The cycles move as precisely as a clock strikes your hour. Thus, the gateway from intelligent energy to intelligent infinity opens regardless of circumstance on the striking of the hour.
To me, the part I put in bold implies that a different number of years might be involved in each planet's pattern of experience.
(11-30-2009, 05:31 PM)transiten Wrote: Once again the supression of the female principle and controll of "nature"....
Until this balance is reached, no harvest as far as i am concerned.
I appreciate that you describe something unbalanced and unfair in our present society. However I don't see where Ra says that the time of harvest for Earth, which comes from the planet's path through the energies of the solar system, is delayed until society is balanced and fair. As I see it, if you are right, and Ra is right, then there will be a lot of people (both men and women) too consumed with the kind of prejudices you mentioned to polarize for harvestability.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - transiten - 12-01-2009
Hello Questioner
I must admit i have not studied the LOO for very long and i have not read it all through. I just started to read "Living the Law of One" that i borrowed from ayadew the other day. Also i have this habit of mine to joke a little bit too much about serious issues.
In this case it might actually mean that i will choose to stay in 3D to help balancing this martian/venusian energies and if the harvest can take place in a timeband between 100-700 years, there will be plenty of time to integrate animus and anima if you may excuse my own playful jungian ramblings.
transiten
RE: 3rd density time and precession - litllady - 12-01-2009
(12-01-2009, 11:54 AM)transiten Wrote: Hello Questioner
I must admit i have not studied the LOO for very long and i have not read it all through. I just started to read "Living the Law of One" that i borrowed from ayadew the other day. Also i have this habit of mine to joke a little bit too much about serious issues.
In this case it might actually mean that i will choose to stay in 3D to help balancing this martian/venusian energies and if the harvest can take place in a timeband between 100-700 years, there will be plenty of time to integrate animus and anima if you may excuse my own playful jungian ramblings.
transiten
Hello transiten!
Can you tell me if that 'timeband of 100-700 years' is something that you just threw out there as an example or did you read that somewhere?
Those numbers resonate with me deeply, I think there is a timeband of that amount of time. If we do relate to the zodiac any sort of 'time' for what ever reason, I 'feel' we are half way around the clock. We have descened for 12,000 years (almost there 100-700 more years) and we are at the point of in between a breath or heart beat. For Earth, there is another 12,000 years of ascending with its offspring's, some would call the golden age. I feel the zodiac clock would start in Leo and I think the sphinx tells us this.
Course these are just personal resonates that I have no real logical reason to assume such
but just sharing ramblins.My best
Lynette
RE: 3rd density time and precession - Questioner - 12-01-2009
(12-01-2009, 11:54 AM)transiten Wrote: Also i have this habit of mine to joke a little bit too much about serious issues.
No worries, mate, as the Aussies say.
Quote:... if you may excuse my own playful jungian ramblings
Please feel free to ramble joyfully any way you please, as far as I'm concerned.
Just be aware that in this forum, you'll find that people discussing the Law of One material often try to stay close to what the L/L Research books have to say.
RE: 3rd density time and precession - transiten - 12-01-2009
Hello Lynette!
I don't include your post because then my keyboard locks up the computor for some reason.
Well now this "timeband" for possible harvest is what has been mentioned in the "David Wilcockthread" whether there will be an instantaneous harvest for all in 2012 or a succesive one, the main issue of disagreement as i've come to understand between David Wilcocks interpretation of the Rachannelings and the one of Carla/Don and ...don't remember his name...or have i totally misunderstood everything here?
I cannot give you the quote but it's in this thread.
Liliane transiten