Quote:(2.2) However, this entity’s beliefs were accepted by very few. His priests gave lip service only, without the spiritual distortion towards seeking. The peoples continued in their beliefs. When this entity was no longer in this density, again the polarized beliefs in the many gods came into their own and continued so until the one known as Muhammad delivered the peoples into a more intelligible distortion of mind/body/spirit relationships.
I am assuming here that they are referring to the Muhammad who received the Koran. However, I find a pretty huge gap between Ra's philosophy and that which is in the Koran so I wonder if Ra is not referring to the Koran but the philosophy of Muhammed in general?
Have you read much of the Quran? It's easy for people to fixate on certain quotes they love to cherry-pick, but on the whole, there's a lot of good material in it as well. It was actually quite progressive for the time, and relative to a lot of the tribal customs that were being practiced. For example, despite how warlike some Muslims have managed to be, it actually has very strict rules on when war can and can't be fought, and strongly discourages being an aggressor. For that matter, it also has the first known set of rules governing the humane treatment of POWs which are roughly on par with the Geneva Conventions... when Muslms bother to follow them. Or it's easy for people to say its rules on marriage are sexist, but previously, wives basically had no rights at all and tribal warlords would sometimes collect harems of hundreds.
There are actually a lot of very positive features to it in the big picture even if, like most of the old holy books, a lot of the specifics no longer really fit that well into the modern world. Plus, unlike the New Testament, we can be almost entirely certain it does accurately represent the teachings of Mohammed. Jesus's teachings were so distorted following his death we really only have the slightest idea what he actually said.
It's a very complex work of philosophy which also attempts to be a spiritual and legal guide. It's not something that can be easily boiled down in a couple sentences.
Well yeah, I was reading through the Koran and sure there is lots of good material in it too (although I find the labguage, at least of the translation I have, a little weird and archaic), but I am confused by how much it talks about punishment, believers and 'unbelievers'.
More specifically in relation to Ra's philosophy and mention of it.
Broadly speaking, I agree - that's the aspect of the Quran I have the most trouble with as well. But then again, in context, it was fighting an ideological "war" of sorts on multiple fronts: Simultaneously trying to combat the polytheistic melange of various tribal/house gods who basically just served as justifications for their tribes' behaviors, as well as the corruption Mohammed (presumably) saw in Christianity and Judaism which had led them away from higher truths.
Plus, of course, while some devout Muslims don't like talking about this aspect, there are many elements of the Quran which can realistically only be seen as political compromises. He couldn't get the tribes to give up their slaves entirely, so he put strict rules on the treatment of slaves. Warlords wouldn't give up their harems, so he limited the size of their harem while giving their wives more rights. The (pagan) Kabaa was the most popular worship site -and tourist trap- in the entire Arabian peninsula, so he appropriates it as a symbol of Islam rather than tearing it down. Etc.
More or less, I ask myself if there's a way the Quran could have been composed without self-righteously taking the moral high ground and still be effective as a unifying document, and I'm really not seeing another solution to the problem. It's a document that's very much a product of the time and place in which it was written, and it's trying to carry out a VERY difficult balancing act between earthly and spiritual needs.
So whenever I'm browsing it, I tend to try to focus on its spiritual advice, without worrying too much about stuff that's clearly the product of 7th Century Arabian politics.
quran was channeled and it was in a way that was dimmed necessary and effective
if it was up to muhammad himself he wouldn't succeed.
quran was given to savage ppl and Law of One or zohar are given to more spiritually awakened ppl at harvest.. it only makes sense
btw muhammad's descendants tried to make things better!
hossein was like a warrior kind of christ! and became martyr to give their ppl a sort of christian concept of sacrifice for otherself once more
rest of the descendants were either jailed by negative authorities of their time or were all teachers. hossein and ali were fourth density but their children and the children of their children were more fifth density in attitude to fix the negative distortions in quran eventually
I'm not sure if it is ingrained prejudice and/or ignorance, but I find myself continuously unable to dissociate Islam with violence, hostility and judgement. Of course there is much good to be found as well but ....... I don't know, I find it hard to balance the two and not let the good be overshadowed and corrupted by the not so good.
From my understanding of Islam, they see that the Jeudo/Christian religions became corrupted and that the Qur'an put it right. Maybe thats to simple but from what i read on wiki, it seems to be the belief.
Well I think I am going to have to at least give the Quran and Law of One both a good read through and examine more closely from there.
However, there are some key points about the culture within which the Quran was born that I hadn't properly considered. The word 'political' does very much seem to be the feel I get from the book. I think what bothers me about it is that it often seems to be talking from the perspective of the angels or the Creator and they are the ones talking about punishment, believers and unbelievers, but in my experience with angels they would never say such things so I wonder if these are fallen angels who have given the Quran.
(07-30-2015, 07:55 AM)Aion Wrote: [ -> ]I think what bothers me about it is that it often seems to be talking from the perspective of the angels or the Creator and they are the ones talking about punishment, believers and unbelievers, but in my experience with angels they would never say such things so I wonder if these are fallen angels who have given the Quran.
That wouldn't really be consistent with what Ra said in 2.2, tho. At least, if the Quran were the product of negative teachings, I cannot imagine why he'd bring it up in that context. Also, the first parts of the Quran were said to be originally dictated by one of the
arch-angels. (Gabriel, iirc.) Which I'd presume means a 5D or even 6D contact, rather than 4D. But later on, Mohammed started more freely composing them in his own room, without going to meditate on the mountain and such. So extrapolating greatly, I'd suggest that the enterprise may have begun as a passive channeling and later became an active one. (like the shift from Ra to Q'uo)
Frankly, I really wish that someone had followed-up on that one, rather than focusing on Jesus. Learning Ra's perspective on some of the other great prophets/teachers would have been really nice. I'm also really curious about the tale of Prince Arjuna's meeting with Krishna, for that matter.
If I get bored in the next few days, I might look up a list of the original transmission order of the Sura and work out which ones were before\after Mohammed stopped going up the mountain. It'd be interesting to see if the tone changed, although since I'd be working with translations it might be hard to tell. My basic hypothesis would be that the early Sura would focus on philosophy, cosmology, and the nature of God -stuff a 5D or 6D would want to talk about- whereas the later ones would be more earthly or control-based because of Mohammed having to adapt the teachings to fit his political situation.
That's an interesting hypothesis, I will contemplate that. This is exactly why I'm confused and why I think Ra probably considers this type of information transient and did not give much detail on the thought.
If people have conscience, than we don't need 'holy books' or prophets.
I know the quran is distorted. Too many rules, it's designed to control people. Of course there are good things in it, but this is another sophisticated trick of the Orions. They made Abraham an insane person (contacted by the same 'Gabriel') and religious people are accepting it like a 'test'. This is not a Confederation method.
(07-30-2015, 04:55 PM)darklight Wrote: [ -> ]If people have conscience, than we don't need 'holy books' or prophets.
I know the quran is distorted. Too many rules, it's designed to control people. Of course there are good things in it, but this is another sophisticated trick of the Orions. They made Abraham an insane person (contacted by the same 'Gabriel') and religious people are accepting it like a 'test'. This is not a Confederation method.
Quote:16.19 Questioner: If this entity was positively oriented, how was the Orion group able to contact him?
Ra: I am Ra. This was an intensive, shall we say, battleground between positively oriented forces of Confederation origin and negatively oriented sources. The one called Moishe was open to impression and received the Law of One in its most simple form. However, the information became negatively oriented due to his people’s pressure to do specific physical things in the third-density planes. This left the entity open for the type of information and philosophy of a self-service nature.
16.20 Questioner: It would be unlike an entity fully aware of the knowledge of the Law of One to ever say “Thou shalt not.” Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
If the above Ra quotes hint at anything, then they are telling when applied to the quran.
http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=3022
This was a thread where a former muslim (user unity100) had learned about the Law of One and debated another user who to me seemed like an active muslim(user crown) at the time on the nature of the quran and muhammed.
Quote:APeacefulWarrior:
I really wish that someone had followed-up on that one, rather than focusing on Jesus. Learning Ra's perspective on some of the other great prophets/teachers would have been really nice. I'm also really curious about the tale of Prince Arjuna's meeting with Krishna, for that matter.
There is a follow up with Q'uo which is a group containing Ra.
Quote:Q'uo Sunday Meditation March 25, 2007
Jim: We have another question, Q’uo. As this month marks the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and we in the West have so little unbiased information about him and his way, I was wondering if you could add to what those of Ra said about this entity being a Messenger of the Law of One. I also would like to ask about the nature of his spiritual transmission, which is still so evident within the many Sufi orders today.
We are those of Q’uo, my brother, and we believe that we are aware of your query. The one known as Mohammed is one with the same energy that created Moses, Elijah, Nahum, Jeremiah, Isaiah and all of the other prophets and priests that responded to the call of that entity which we may call Yahweh, the “name” of the Creator that cannot be said because it is too sacred.[4] This Mohammed also was a prophet of this one God.
The problems resulting from the Koran are the same problems resulting from a good, solid reading of the Old Testament and those two works should be considered together when forming an opinion concerning these matters, for there is much in all the literature, not only of the Koran and the Old Testament but in those books and writings which did not make it into the final versions of those sacred works but had a good deal of information along those lines to share about this creation of the “One God” which, instead of being the one infinite Creator, was a kind of artifact made up of those of one of the groups that were guardians of your planet in an attempt to create a more spiritually capable human being.
Those whom they altered genetically, prior to placing them upon this planet in times gone by, they felt the need to follow. It is ironic, indeed, my friends, that those in your Middle East—the followers of Jesus, the followers of Yahweh, and the followers of Allah—are in a state of mortal combat. They are all of one blood. They are all of one teaching. It is a mark of the inefficacy of making physical changes in order to create more viable spiritual workers that this is so. That which was created to improve the genetic pool of gifts of the humans thus altered were the mind to be more intelligent, the body to be more strong, and the will to be more powerful. What no entity can put into a gene is any code that has to do with spirituality, for this is that which can only be chosen by free will.
Free will is where we began in this discussion and free will is where this question also takes us. By free will, entities following these teachers have chosen to focus upon judgment and justice: an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; and someone being right and someone being wrong; someone being the holy people and the rest of the world not being the holy people. Followers have focused upon this rather than the inclusive gifts of the spirit that are equally obvious in the holy works themselves.
There is no more hospitable a book than the Koran or the Old Testament. The fatted calf is offered in many, many stories; not just one but sometimes thousands of them, because of the glory and the joy of certain meetings and certain occasions. Hospitality, indeed, to this day is a very, very important part of the culture of these entities who worship this “One God.”
We would suggest that it would be helpful to look for the positive gifts of the one known as Mohammed in the mysticism of the Sufi’s, just as one may most likely find the most positive aspects of the Old Testament writing and prophets in that small circle of entities who have worked with the Kabala to develop the Tree of Life. In both cases the outer husks of religion, the dogma, the exclusiveness, and so forth, have been cast aside to get to the heart of the fruit of spirituality which is the same in any religion or system of worship. And that is simply the adoration of the one infinite Creator by the creation that has been made. The Creator responds with Its adoration for that which It has created. This combination creates an infinite atmosphere of unconditional love. Those who focus down to this point from any road, whether it be Christian, Jewish, Islam or any other, are doing the same good work.
Quote:Questioner: Was Yahweh then of the Confederation?
Ra: I am Ra. Yahweh was of the Confederation but was mistaken in its attempts to aid.
Questioner: Then Yahweh’s communications did not help or create what Yahweh wished for them to create. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. The results of this interaction were quite mixed. Where the entities were of a vibrational sum characteristic which embraced oneness, the manipulations of Yahweh were very useful. Wherein the entities of free will had chosen a less positively oriented configuration of sum total vibratory complex, those of the Orion group were able for the first time to make serious inroads upon the consciousness of the planetary complex.
Questioner: Can you tell me specifically what allowed the most serious of these inroads to be made by the Orion group?
Ra: I am Ra. This will be the final full question.
Specifically those who are strong, intelligent, etc., have a temptation to feel different from those who are less intelligent and less strong. This is a distorted perception of oneness with otherselves. It allowed the Orion group to form the concept of the holy war, as you may call it. This is a seriously distorted perception. There were many of these wars of a destructive nature.
Quote:Q'uo Sunday Meditation September 13, 1987
Carla: Well I just have so many questions. By associating the Old Testament and the Koran teachings together, you sparked something in my mind that is from earlier research which suggested that the Jewish people were a genetically improved brand of the species that was tinkered with by an entity called Jehovah, to make them more wise, more intelligent, more physically able and so forth, so that they would be better able to seek the truth.
The teachings of Mohammed—it happens to be the same area of the world exactly, it’s the same people, just different tribes, basically—I was wondering if these two teachings shared what I might call a Jehovahist influence? In other words, was Mohammed also the prophet of the One God who was being relayed through the distortions of the one known as Jehovah?
I am Q’uo, and we may suggest in this regard that the similarity between these two great teachings is due primarily to the fact that each culture was in the time of its flourishing existing under conditions which were somewhat hostile in regards not only to the other cultures which surrounded them, but in regards to the very physical environment in which they sought to make their homes and to grow as cultures.
Thus, the, as you may call it, racial perspective was such that the struggle for growth and survival was viewed as one which was difficult, even harsh, and at times foreboding. Therefore, the call for illumination and inspiration which these cultures sent forth by their very being was answered in a manner which presented to these people information and inspiration which was seen or filtered in such a manner that the information was filled with injunctions and conditions that required a physical and mental and even spiritual struggle to be undertaken with some degree of that which you would call fear to motivate the effort.
Thus, the information which came to these entities in response to their call was colored, shall we say, by their response to their experience as a culture.
Quote:Q'uo Sunday Meditation October 3, 2004
Certainly the one known as Yahweh falls far short of expressing what we understand to be some of the more obvious characteristics of the creative principle, those being its universality and its unity. How could a creative principle set one entity over another when, to the Creator, all things are one, all beings are children of the same parent, brothers and sister of one deity, one Creator?
Quote:Q'uo Special Meditation July 16, 2005
The energy of Mohammed the Prophet and the one Creator named Allah are equally energies of a masculine, towering and authoritative nature. There was a time upon your sphere when this energy was appropriate. That time is long past. Yet those who have incarnated, from Atlantis to Babylon to Rome and so forth, have tried again and again and again to hold onto this increasingly sterile and unproductive creator-energy that is what this instrument would call yang in nature, exemplifying aggression and control, those things that, in the process of evolution, have become representative of service to self rather than service to others.
Hello,
As I understand it, Muhammad introduced One God in the multi-gods-environment. That was THE most important for/from the perspective of Ra, as it was aligned with “Oneness”. The content of the ideology itself was secondary.
I’ve watched once quite good movie about that period: "The Message" (1977)
All I have Best in me for You