Ra's Adventures in Wonderland

[Tenet Nosce]

Tenet, I'm currious, what is your interpretation of this quote?

Let us consider it in context:

77.18 Questioner: I guess, under the first distortion, it was the free will of the Logos to choose to evolve without free will. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

So, going into the next quote, they are discussing those Logoi that chose to evolve without free will.

77.19 Questioner: Do the Logoi that choose this type of evolution choose both the service-to-self and the service-to-others path for different Logoi, or do they choose just one of the paths?

Ra: I am Ra. Those, what you would call, early Logoi which chose lack-of-free-will foundations, to all extents with no exceptions, founded Logoi of the service-to-others path. The, shall we say, saga of polarity, its consequences and limits, were unimagined until experienced.

Since these early Logoi chose to evolve without free will, they (and their sub-logoi) all evolved on the positive path. It wasn't until a Logos chose to evolve with free will that the negative path became actualized. Prior to this, it still existed in potentiality.

Therefore, it had been perceived, but not yet experienced.

77.20 Questioner: In other words you are saying that originally the Logoi that did not choose this free will path did not choose it simply because they had not conceived of it and that later Logoi, extending the first distortion farther down through their evolution, experienced it as an outcropping or growth from that extension of the first distortion. Am I correct in saying that?

Ra: I am Ra. Yes.

Ra agrees.

77.21 Questioner: Then did this particular Logos that we experience plan for this polarity and know all about it prior to its plan? I suspect that this is what happened.

Ra: I am Ra. This is quite correct.

Don says that our Logos knew all about polarity prior to its plan. Ra says this is quite correct.

77.22 Questioner: In that case, as a Logos, you would have an advantage of selecting the form of acceleration, you might say, of spiritual evolution by planning what we call the major archetypical philosophical foundations and planning these as a function of the polarity that would be gained in third density. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is exquisitely correct.

The Logos chose to use polarity as a means of evolution. Ra says this is exquisitely correct.

This is not to say that the Logos manifested the positive and negative paths of polarization, and then secretly "crossed their fingers" that sub-logoi would take one, and not the other.

Quite to the contrary, if none of the sub-logoi were to choose the negative path, then what would be the point? What would be the point of the negative path, if no entities were to experience it?

Also- Do you realize that an entity could polarize on the negative path, and not play the role of a "bad guy"? They could play the role of a "benevolent despot" for example.