01-08-2012, 10:48 PM
(01-08-2012, 10:23 PM)yossarian Wrote: (Adding a few more cents)
I agree with you SomaticDreams about how this channelling demonstrates the mutual influence of channeller and source.
I think the biased language is directly happening due to the nature of the channelling process. Carla plays a role in selecting the right words to use, and she uses words that makes sense to her. Her explication of Buddhism therefore sounds a lot like what makes sense to her, what her perspective on it would be according to a mystical Christian and a Ra follower.
In the case of describing the Creator, I bet Carla sees the creator as both the Infinite One, the All-Being, as well as the more personal and anthropomorphized God. Her conception of the infinite includes both a personalized God as well as an impersonal Infinite Awareness.
This is how I see the Creator as well. Yogis endorse this view of the creator - seeing everything as the infinite one and infinity - and yet at the same time they suggest a personal relationship with a humanized creator can also be beneficial.
Buddhists, on the other hand, do not personalize infinity at all, and Christians exclusively personalize God. Hindus do both and the Ra Material also does both.
In the case of Carla, it's quite likely that she received a thought-form indicating "The One Infinite Creator" which she interprets to mean both God as well as Infinity or All-Being. The Ra concept of "The One Infinite Creator" is a bit of a melding of the two major ways of seeing the ultimate, infinite, union of everything.
So you can see that the purpose of the Q'uo channel process is certainly not to give an accurate and balanced representation of the two religions/religious figures. The channel is inextricably tied to Carla's personal vocabulary and apparently also to her personal experiences. Neutral language appears impossible in this type of channelling. You're always getting a big dose of the channeller as well as the message.
This might be up for discussion in "Advanced Studies" on the nature of channeling, methods of discerning distortion in channeled material (there is already some), and the nature of the infinite one, contrasted in all such traditions.
The only problem I see with the personification of the Infinite is the reification of the idea of a self, as being 'apart' from the creator. We are, to an extent, 'broken off' from this source, being individuated, but however- the language we use speaks us, and so I feel it important to use language that reflects a closer conception of the infinite. Other perspectives are useful for coming to an understanding, of course, but I believe there can be agreement on such matters.
Utilizing such language (as Ra does eloquently throughout the material) not only gives us a new conception of cosmology, but also a new language to utilize (densities, 3D-4D, catalyst, etc). This has greatly increased the progression of many beings, has it not? I believe this progress in language, and how we describe phenomena to be incredibly important, if not the most important (besides experiential catalyst). What we work with here though, on this board, is words.