Share your vision for the harvest

[Bring4th_Austin]

Going back to a way earlier discussion we had, I was trying to point out the words which Ra says which would leave it readily open for interpretation by anyone. The "probability" and "approximately" are open for interpretation to someone who would wish to still believe in harvest if nothing happened in the near future. "It was just a probability, as well as an approximation." That isn't something that could be argued with, and would simply have to be dismissed on one's own logic. I wasn't trying to say that harvest could last that long, or that the process was that long, simply that it could be argued by someone that 2011, 2012, or anytime in the near future, isn't necessarily the date for harvest.

there is a certain limit which words 'approximately' and 'probability' can accommodate in regard to possibilities. a probability defined as having a time period in between 100 and 700 years, is different from the probability window of something that is told to happen at a certain date, and not be a period that goes over that date.

Ra does not define these limits, so we have to define them ourselves. You define your's more logically than someone who would still be waiting after 50 years, but since the limits are not defined in the material, it is personal judgement. And it would simply be opinion to call that other person's judgement flawed.

- harvest was told NOT to be something that spans a period
- harvest was told to happen IN 2011
- merging these, one can only conclude that harvest would be something that would encompass at most a year, even if it was a period.
- one can at most conclude that harvest would be something that would last at most around a years' vicinity
- one can at most conclude that harvest may happen in 2011, 2010, 2009, 2012, 2013 or similar.
- it is not possible to slap a 900 year period

Do any of these rule out the possibility that harvest happens in a certain moment, but entities incarnated in space/time will not experience it until they die? I think I might have a different idea of what "gradualist" might mean than others. To me, a "gradual" harvest is one that simply allows for the entities within incarnation to die a natural death before they are harvested. So harvest happens, entities not in incarnation are harvested at that moment, and then as the entities within incarnation die, they are harvested...so it only lasts as long as it takes that generation to die. And it's possible that 3D entities were done incarnating years ago, meaning that the last of the pure 3D entities would be gone in less than a life-time. New entities being born would be harvested entities in 3D/4D bodies. That is as gradual as I see the material allowing for. Besides the "probability/possibility" thing, that is the ambiguity I talk about.

Besides the probabilities and approximations, what I am calling ambiguous is the actual mechanic of harvest, as none of us know what it is or how it will happen. We know that a gateway to intelligent infinity is opened. The ambiguous part I see is the fact that it could easily be that it is opened for those entities in time/space, and then all those passing into time/space after that time period will have access to it as well. I'm not denying the possibility that it may happen for those in space/time, but that is not the only possible scenario I see.

that is incorrect. harvest mechanisms were clearly defined in numerous subjects. these range from earth changes, to moving into 4d, to what happens after death, archetypal talk regarding logoic archetypes etc. mechanism of harvest was also explained for pre-veil, and compared with mechanism of post-veil.

I'm talking about what happens at the "moment" of harvest, or when harvest "starts." Basically, the description Ra gives of harvest as the testing to see what incarnation nexus is appropriate. I'm not talking about the mechanisms surrounding harvest, I'm talking about harvest itself and how it is experienced, and whether it is experienced by people in incarnation.

Ra says here "these entities are not a social memory complex," whereas Ra never says "entities within incarnation will be aware of the opening of the gateway, entities within incarnation will be aware of the harvesting, entities within incarnation will immediately be harvested." I (now) realize you've changed your viewpoint somewhat, but I'm still seeing both possibilities, where "harvest," starting instantly and lasting until the last person unharvested person in incarnation at that point dies naturally, only being harvested after death...or harvested instantly from space/time, or somewhere in between.

the above quote makes your issue with not the date of harvest, but the mechanism of harvest and whether it includes death, or not.

The "issue," which it's not an issue at all because I'm not denying that you could very well be right about harvest, is both with the date and whether it includes death or not. I personally feel it's the most likely situation that harvest will happen in the next couple years, or possibly already happened, but that's because of my personal judgement of what Ra means by "approximate" and "probability." The death thing, I don't think it's clear whether something will happen to "force" the harvest of entities from space/time (force them out of incarnation), or allow them to leave incarnation naturally.

if, there was a probability of harvest taking 50 years, that would make harvest an event that is spread over a period, and ra would TELL it. don asked whether it was spread over a period or at a certain date, and the answer was a certain date. i am appalled that we are still discussing this.

Right, I've approached the discussion from the wrong angle because I think I misunderstood what the "gradualist" standpoint was. I never thought harvest itself could be spread out, and 3D entities still incarnate into this plane gaining experience to be harvested. I thought the debate was whether everyone dies AT harvest, or whether everyone dies naturally and then is harvested. Whether instant or gradual, I don't think 3D entities have been incarnating for a while, and I don't think 3D work is still a reason for incarnation on Earth. In fact, I think 3D work is mostly done, and as 3D vibes cease from the Logos, pure 3D entities will have a rough time existing until their death. But whether they'll be forced to die, or die naturally, I thought that was the debate. And that's where I didn't see any clarification from Ra.

I've explicitly seen Tenet address the whole of the "gradualist standpoint" as being caught on some sort of bias, and this is what I was thinking you were agreeing with.

i am agreeing with it. it is explicitly told in the material that harvest is not an event that is spread over a period of time. the transition into a 4d plane/society was told to take from 100 to 700 years with the current probabilities then.

there is indeed a lot of bias surrounding this issue.

as for 'psychoanalysis qualification' or any other concern regarding observing bias, the below sequence i experienced with icaro is sufficient for me - i will just include part of my reply to icaro :

Wouldn't the discussion with Icaro only reveal Icaro's own biases? And isn't it presumptuous in either case to assume you can define these biases? I don't think one case can be applied to the whole other side of the debate.

Like I said, I don't know if I completely understand your new perspective. I tried reading the thread over a couple times...what do you consider "short harvest?" I don't think there's any Ra material to support a harvest that is longer than the remaining lifespan of entities incarnated during harvest, only material which could support that harvest wouldn't start for a number of years, thus not being over for an even longer number of years.

Is the "short harvest" you talk about basically what I am saying? Only long enough for the entities to die of natural causes?

you can go back 2-3 pages and read what i found and what i concluded with my findings. i will just summarize here - if you need pointers and reasoning, you should just roll the pages back :

- as per the major important quote of Ra responding with a certain date to a question that asks whether it was to happen at a certain date or be spread over time, it is definite that harvest is not an event that goes over a years' duration with our year concept. so, harvest should take 365 years the most.

I'm assuming you mean days.

even if possibilities introduced into this, the duration cannot be longer than a year and a half with good probability - if, it was likely to be a period that long, Ra would tell that it would take in between X years and Y years. they did not - they told it was to happen at a certain year. there are no exceptions - Ra gives the period interval when they talk about periods. this basically says harvest will happen in a duration shorter than a year. it also means it is near, very likely in 2011.

What explicitly in Ra is denying the idea that this event that happens will force entities out of incarnation to be harvested? While the major event happens in a moment, and all the entities not in incarnation at that moment are harvested (which is what Ra explicitly stated), and then, as a result of that event, entities leaving incarnation will have the opportunity to be harvested.

- first i had the notion of dying not be a necessity for harvest. however as per the quotes i shared, basing on the wordage used for those who were harvestable and who were harvested, their incarnational status (some deceased, some living, some 2nd cycle harvestables), it seems that dying is a necessity for completion of harvest, EVEN if opening the gateway to intelligent infinity during incarnation is told to be a ticket to next octave of experience. (even surpassing harvest process itself) but, the wordage used for, and the situation of the harvestable and harvested entities, basically tell us that the word 'harvested' requires replacement in a 4d continuum, here or elsewhere - this requires death. previously, i didnt think i was necessary to die for getting harvested. now, i see that the status 'harvestable' and 'harvested' are not used interchangeably. in this light, the phrase 'all are harvested regardless of progress' becomes rather prophetic.

"Regardless of progress" could easily just mean that the entities who have not polarized enough to experience the next density will also be harvested, because they wouldn't have been affected by the first two harvests. Basically it would mean "we take the 3D entities out of here because this ships turning 4D and they can't handle it." Do you feel the only option is that the 3D entities incarnate now are forced out of incarnation to be harvested?

That would be true for this particular statement, but I was referring to posts such as the one stating "A gradualist view is very human-centric," continuing on explaining that gradualists are upset about the idea of death or "leaving someone behind."

it actually is. gradualist view is SO comfortable that, there would not be a rush to increase harvest numbers with that perspective. people would have at least 70 years from the start of the harvest to live, and there would be 100 years to work on increasing the harvest, and 70 of these years would be under the comfortable (!) unhindered instreamings of 4d vibrations.

Comfort was definitely not in my view of a gradual harvest. I figured the 3D entities who had not become harvestable would probably live the rest of their lives in a state of "depression," or scared...their ability to function waning with 3D vibes and 3D thoughtforms. The 3D thoughtforms of our society would be enough to allow them to function in a 4D environment, but unless they'd done some considerable seeking, it wouldn't be a comfortable place to be.

which would bolster any kind of spiritual work or awareness. moreover, the gradualist view also accommodates a great situation in which the existing dynamics and mechanics of life as established are not disturbed in an uncomfortable fashion at all - at most, they 'change' rapidly due to 'fast awakening' of people en masse.

I again thought the "fast" change was a part of the gradualist standpoint. Just not an instant change. 3D thoughtforms and ideas are purged from society in the next 100-700 years, which the 3Ders are long-gone by that point, because none were incarnating even before harvest actually happened. The dual-bodies are left to change society. That was my view of gradual.

Ra very clearly describes that 4D bodies are born of gradual bisexual reproductive evolution. I've tried showing you this quote 3 or 4 times now Sad

the problem with mystery surrounding 4d bodies being gradually born out of normal evolution is, the 4d and 3d being defined as different planes/dimensions. this implies that due to 3-4d bodies being present both in 3d and 4d, they are also undertaking actions in 4d without even knowing. it is possible that their manifestation in 4d, is doing this reproduction in 4d, and creating 4d bodies.

But Ra said starting with 3D bodies, gradually becoming 4D bodies. In a gradual standpoint, they could easily become more and more aware of the 4D plane as they evolve. The body evolution will likely mimic very closely the mind evolution of society. The 4D sphere could seamlessly replace the 3D sphere as seamlessly as bodies evolve. An entity at either end of the transition would notice a major difference.

what leads me to this possibility is the fact that the dimensions 4d and 3d are quite different. there would be a certain point where a body shows more of the 4d features than 3d features, and what would happen at that point in time regarding visibility of 4d, or this and that paranormal phenomenon that is radically different from 3d ? you have a daughter - now you see her, now you dont, is it ?

Would the body be directly related to what the mind perceived? Perhaps an entity could perceive 4D just as well as their "more evolved" daughter, and with each generation 3D is shed a bit more as the societal mind perceives 4D more and more.

however this is an interpretation. 3d-4d entities can stay as much as they want to on this planet and continue reproducing - this is their home planet, their bodies can withstand 4d energies and they dont need to be harvested. others, however, need to be harvested.

Right, in a gradual interpretation this would be done by 3D entities simply not incarnating any more, and once the ones alive today are gone, we'll have seen the last 3D entity till the next round.

- like tenet mentioned, you cant just 'depopulate' 7 billion entities like that. 700 years of transition requires a population decline rate of 60 million.

Why is depopulation necessary? If everyone born now is a 4D entity, and they continue to reproduce as they get older, the population could stay the same as 3Ders die naturally.

- 3d bodies cant withstand 4d. planet will fully align to 4d vibrations soon. this will make 4d a habitable solid sphere. what will happen to 3d entities for the duration of that 700 years of transition if they live here ? dropping like flies due to illnesses and fast death introduced due to randomly interacting with 4d ?

From a gradual standpoint, I would assume they would sustain off of the remaining 3D thoughtforms, and function less well in society as the thought forms are purged.

---

Not sure what you mean. It's safe to say that no children being born right now are in strictly 3D bodies, meaning they all have transitional bodies, meaning they're all harvested 4D entities (from other spheres).

that is an incorrect conclusion in many ways. you cannot put an unharvested entity in a body which can perceive 4d, and also make use of intelligent infinity in ways 3d entities cant.

it not only would override the free will of other entities (even if the inborn 3d entity is a baby yet) in a myriad of ways, but also would cause jeopardy in regard to the overall violet balance and mental stability of the 3d entity due to being able to perceive a density/vibration it is not ready for it yet.

if you look at the act of harvest happening in time space, you will see that it is basically the determination of the violet balance of entity in respect to 4d conditions. if you are deemed placeable in a 4d nexus by your violet balance being able to provide for it, you are harvested.

what you propose, basically totally misses that important information. there would be no need for a harvest if you could just plug a 3d entity in a 3-4d body or a 4d body and subject it to 4d conditions and vibrations.

im totally leaving out the fact that in Ra material it is nowhere even hinted that entities other than already harvested ones being born in 3-4d bodies. not even wanderers were told to be born with these bodies, and actually to the contrary - it is told that wanderers accepted 3d limitations of a body in order to not infringe upon free will and maybe activate higher density bodies and live like gods. this would not change just prior to harvest - the principle of infringement would still stay there.

What I mean is they're all harvested beings. Not 3D souls being born into dual bodies. Why would 3D entities incarnate on Earth right now? 3D work is done. There's no more time for 3D work. What I mean by saying all are born into dual bodies is that no more 3D entities are incarnating on Earth right now, as it would be a pointless incarnation.