Ra's Adventures in Wonderland

[Tenet Nosce]

I would ask who gets the privilege of making the *correct* interpretation of the Ra Material, or any other document?

The author does. In this case Ra. Which part of my post are you disagreeing with?

Another person might literally, through their own perspective, see a passage as saying something entirely different from what another sees there, and since we don't have Ra on hand to clarify any questions, no one can say with 100% certainty that any personal opinion derived from the material is true or false.

We have 1.1 and 1.6 to clarify. Do you take issue to the restatement of these in the OP? Or are you just speaking in general here?

We also have 1.9. For example, Ra says:

Firstly, you must understand that the distinction between yourself and others is not visible to us.

This is a very clear, plain English, type of declaration. Therefore, any personal opinions that are positing that Ra actually DOES see a real distinction between self and other is in direct conflict with this statement.

Again, one can certainly say that Ra is incorrect in their view. But there is no valid argument to be made as to what their view actually is. Thus, any following statements in the material about "self" and "other" are to be interpreted in the light of Ra's clear and unequivocal statement in 1.9. Which means that these two terms, self and other, are entirely interchangeable as far as the Law of One is concerned.

In fact, the assertion that there is no true distinction between "self" and "other" is merely a restatement of the Law of One, itself. Therefore any philosophy or opinion which presupposes such a distinction is, by definition, NOT the Law of One.

In my experience, once you truly understand yourself, the need to prove the correctness of your own beliefs fades and the opinions of others become interesting instead of threatening. And should you come upon a distortion in your thoughts, it can simply be analyzed and cleared for greater truth to flow through- a painless process. Every time I see someone vehemently fighting to prove a point I can't help but think they're trying to prove it to themselves more than anyone else.

My experience agrees with your own. I've noticed much less of a need/want/desire to engage in proving points within myself as time goes on, and more of my own points have been proven wrong through experience.

However, that being said, much of my point-proving in the past has been centered around restating what Ra actually said, especially in noting the tendency to jump right into the forum without having first read the material, as is specifically requested in the guidelines. Not trying to impose my own interpretation of what Ra said onto others. Wherein I have made an interpretation, it is stated as an opinion.

The motive of this is to serve newer members to understand what it is that Ra actually said, and to lessen the propensity to become confused by certain dogma which has been built up around what Ra said, which are actually in direct contradiction to it, but yet being presented as if they are in congruence with it.