The Ra Material minus the elaborate/ superflous language

[rva_jeremy]

How about I rephrase the question. Does anyone have a problem with a version of the material existing that has some of the extraneous info in strike-through (considering nothing is left out or even re-ordered)?

That's a good way to phrase it, Parsons.  I think there's a fundamental concern -- "problem" may not be the appropriate word -- with editing Ra in a way that obscures the editor.

If I restate in my own words a passage in the material, I have made it utterly transparent who is saying what: it is a restatement of material as I understand it and as I choose to express it.  The concepts are from Ra, but they are filtered through me.  It's clear that there is at least more than one level of interpretation here.

If I quote Ra verbatim, I'm making it clear that these are the literal words of the source, and any ambiguity is eligible for a first-order interpretation by the person reading/hearing it.  You don't have to decouple my meaning from those of Ra's (although you could say that merely by excerpting I have introduced my own spin on the material, but let's set that aside).

What you're suggesting, Parsons, is a middle ground, where we simply trim Ra's diction rather than restating from scratch in our own words, but we don't make it abundantly clear who is doing the trimming and why.  It's not necessarily bad or dangerous, but I'm not sure it's very useful, and it can't help but distort -- and in a way that leaves it ambiguous in what way it's distorted and why.

I've actually come around to Ra's style of speaking for one reason: it prevents me from reading fast.  The circumlocution, ornamentation, and denseness of the diction actually forces me to read carefully, and I think I get a lot more out of slowly pouring over passages than simply getting the information into my head as quickly as possible.  In my opinion, it's great that these concepts need to be carefully internalized and can't simply be slurped up by some casual reading like some New Age self-help shlock

I think what we need is a good session-by-session study guide.  The original Law of One study guide sort of tackled the material by topic.  A session-by-session one that could help connect dots and provide commentary and a variety of perspectives on particular passages might also be useful.  Something like Rap Genius but for the sessions.

The way I really felt more engaged in this material was by talking about it with people, because then you have to restate points Ra makes and thereby digest the concepts.  So it would be cool to get a diversity of commentary on passages, give people different perspectives, and -- most of all -- inspire them to think more deeply and explore within for the insights that those of Ra describe.  Because reading the material is only useful to the extent it prompts you to engage in the real study, which is not of these words but of self/creator/creation.