creation

[christine10]

Hi all,

I have a question, even as I sit here reading this for the 5th time Im still unclear about the answer....ok,

Ras explanation of creation is very confusing to me, I think alot of the reason for me is the language barrier,alot of the times I feel like Im reading a tongue twister or other times I feel I got the explanation but then some of the wording throws me off and I second guess myself and Ill try looking for definitions of things and by the time I figure them out Ive forgotten what It was I wondering about in the first place...hehehe....is it just me or does it take some getting use to? Iam very new(6mth) to this and am reading book again (2nd x) have feeling wont be the lastime, alot of info to process but ANYWAYS...sorry for rambling...my question is ........

Is the creation explanation anything like The M - Theory?

Not especially.

But that doesn't mean M-theory is wrong, or that Ra's explanation is wrong. One thing to consider is that M-theory is describing physics. Ra has stated that undistorted intelligent infinity cannot be specified by any physics. Once physics has entered the picture you are already describing the simulated reality, not the simulator of said reality (which is fine by the way, if that's what you aim to do).

The condensed version of Ra's version of creation from my perspective is:

1) Undistorted, unpolarized, and unpotentiated intelligent infinity. This has always existed and always will. This is the foundation of all that is. This is the eighth density and true absolute reality.

2) The first distortion of this infinity is free will. And, interestingly enough, this is actually a limitation or distortion of the viewpoint of intelligent infinity (limitation doesn't equal "bad" though, always remember that -- limits are necessary in order to empower creativity). Basically, the creative energy that constitutes intelligent infinity explores all possibilities that attract it in a random outpouring of creative release. It focuses its infinite light. It explores the concept of finity or limitation.

3) This focusing first naturally results in this infinite consciousness becoming self-aware or self-referential. A kinetic focus appears in relation to unpotentiated intelligent infinity. This is the second distortion that constitutes the focusing of infinity into the macrocosmic Self or Logos.

This is a more specific, or less broad, focus than unpotentiated infinity or undistorted unity. It has assumed the limitation called "self" which provides a different set of parameters for expression.

4) The third distortion is this Logos exploring the concept of creation through the use of intelligent energy, sometimes called "light/love" or "love/light".

There are endless combinations or patterns of energy/matter/limitation so this can continue indefinitely within the confines of the illusory distortion/dream/reality. When the illusion has been explored to satisfaction, the inner seeking, or spiritual gravity we might say naturally unfocuses one from the illusion over the course of "time" (in many forms). And we perceive this gradual "broadening" of perspective as the progression through the densities.

Ok I think I got the jest of it or at least now I understand were I went wrong....of course its not like the m theory cause that would imply that physics exsisted before intelligent infinity....is that correct.....Or wait.....nooooo.....grrrrrrr.....whollycreationbatman.....this is maddening.....now I understand why alot of the "beautiful minds" go crazy...hehehehe

Ok ummm I guess Im still having issues with the terminology, the words dont roll off the tongue to easily, like I said tongue twisters....hehehe.....just when I thought I had a grasp on things!!!

I do understand, in a really crude, rough way..I certainly couldnt explain it as eloquently as you......and thanks very much for taking the time to do so I really appreciate it, wish I was wicked smart... damn it... :-/

Well back to the drawing board!!

Ch1