(10-12-2017, 05:30 PM)GentleWanderer Wrote: A thing that makes me think is the tragic story of the group and Don Elkins. Why does this have happened to positive seekers, is it only because of the loyal opposition or some kind of error done ? Why does it happens i hear about people starting to have strong attacks after they came in contact with the LOO ? Surely a positive being can attract negative attention
but does it has to succumb to it ? I'm enticed to draw the parallel to known teachers, some always stayed pure could be annoyed but not destroyed by neg entities while the others who didn't stayed impeccable like osho or Frederick Lenz had to pay the price.
What about Ra validating equally both the positive and the negative path when our greatest teachers such as Buddha and Jesus only approved the positive path.
In my opinion, I think that a lot of people who are attracted to New Age channelings and teachings aren't actually usually familiar with classical philosophy and spirituality. People talk about chakras and stuff all the time, but how many do you think have read traditional yogic literature on it? Only a handful in my experience. I have barely even, so I don't talk about chakras unless someone else is using them and it's the only point of reference.
However, what you will find is that there is a theme of suffering that takes place on both sides. In classical philosophy there is not as much emphasis on this simplified concept of duality in terms of service. It is wrapped up in 'good and evil' and 'order and chaos' plenty though. I think that while the material is certainly fascinating, the question of how practical or useful it is really comes down to subjective interaction with it. It only seems to be as useful as the person is able to make use of it.
It is true that Ra 'validates' the negative path in a manner (which magically could produce a subconscious idea or bias that could act as an open invitation, like inviting a vampire in to your home) but by that same token the manner in which Ra describes the negative path is... shallow. It is odd to me that for as much detail and meticulousness they go in to to express their own standpoint they are actually incredibly blunt regarding "the Orion entities". Implying that their only desire is conquest and that is all. (Well they pretty much say this.) It just seems strangely 'absolute' compared to how they usually talk about things. Maybe just an issue of oversimplification.
I even had the thought if wouldn't it be funny if Ra was an imposter and the 'Orion entity' was actually a positive entity who was trying to help Carla and the group and all her symptoms weren't actually from 'attacks' but were the backlash of the "Ra" entity trying to hold on to her consciousness. In every situation the prime characteristic that Ra gives to negatives is that they are 'clever'. They also say a common ploy is for the negative to energize the heart and confuse the indigo. Then make such statements that Love is all the protection you need. They always withheld just enough information to maintain confusion, which they of course profess is their positive orientation and respect for free will.
I want to ask, does it seem like as the material progresses the group gets more clear and less confused, or do they seem more confused by the end? It seems to me that by the end of it they were in a more distorted state than when they started and that is something that concerns me. There are numerous times when the group seemed backed in to a corner where the ultimatum was either 'continue' or 'lose the contact' and there just seems to be this strong implication that it is such an enourmous service and such a rare opportunity that how could you possibly quit now? Yet, if they were truly balancing love and wisdom, wouldn't they have cared more for the well-being of Carla and Don than about the contact?
I think they may have been lead in to martyrdom and it might not have just been a choice they made just due to their own natures. Was it worth it?
In my humble opinion, I think the loss wasn't worth the gain, but that's just me.