(12-30-2015, 04:36 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: [ -> ]The question is do they really have attachment to a certain level of harvest or is that our interpretation?
if the logoi choose the more efficient options to implement in their creations then they must prefer efficiency. they are allowed to have biases as unique entities in their own right.
(12-30-2015, 04:40 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: [ -> ]Although it seems true, it seems awkward. How is something really lost?
hypothetically we could see it as a numbers game in a limited opportunity experience. third density only exist for a 75 thousand year window on a select few planets in any given solar system. if the 3d entities dont polarize and graduate then they have to be moved at the end of the time period to another 3d world to continue their experience. that world may only have a limited population. assuming we have a poor harvest it means about 6 billion 3d repeaters are going to be competing for an incarnation in the next planet along with the native population. its a crowded universe and unless u make progress then seniority of vibration with its preferential treatment almost guarantees poor odds for even incarnating.
so lost in the sense of lost opportunity. linear time still exist after all
Then what can really be defined as a lost opportunity? I mean one can live an experience and believe in having lost an opportunity but that doesn't mean it isn't an opportunity for something else? What defines this particular experience opportunity as being lost? Does this imply that even though a new experience has been created it has lost in efficiency?
(12-30-2015, 10:13 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: [ -> ]Then what can really be defined as a lost opportunity? I mean one can live an experience and believe in having lost an opportunity but that doesn't mean it isn't an opportunity for something else? What defines this particular experience opportunity as being lost? Does this imply that even though a new experience has been created it has lost in efficiency?
u cant alter ur imbalances outside of incarnation so u cant become harvestable if u dont incarnate. if the opportunity occurs in rounds of 25000 then not being able secure an incarnation because you havnt polarized enough or arnt senior enough in vibration is equivalent to having lost a last minute opportunity to harvest and move on out of 3D, else your stuck in another 25000 year round cause u didnt use what experience u did have to efficiently polarize.
there must be a surplus of 3d entities wanting to use the last few years of a 3d cycle to become harvestable and it wouldnt surprise me that the population boom from a steady 1 billion to 7 billion wasnt something designed to maximise the number of potential slots.
3d has no purpose except as an interim choice making density, a refresher for higher ups to correct imbalances, or a proselytizing mission. if ur not polarizing or doing the others than yeah ur basically faffing about and being inefficient in ur choices.
like it or not efficiency is key. moving through the densities is just becoming more efficient at using more light of a higher quality and there is a drive towards maximising this and rejoining the creator.
Quote:Questioner: Is the process in positive time/space identical with the process in negative time/space for this healing?
Ra: I am Ra. The process in space/time of the forgiveness and acceptance is much like that in time/space in that the qualities of the process are analogous. However, while in space/time it is not possible to determine the course of events beyond the incarnation but only to correct present imbalances. In time/space, upon the other hand, it is not possible to correct any unbalanced actions but rather to perceive the imbalances and thusly forgive the self for that which is.
The decisions then are made to set up the possibility/probabilities of correcting these imbalances in what you call future space/time experiences. The advantage of time/space is that of the fluidity of the grand overview. The advantage of space/time is that, working in darkness with a tiny candle, one may correct imbalances.
(12-31-2015, 12:08 AM)spero Wrote: [ -> ]3d has no purpose except as an interim choice making density, a refresher for higher ups to correct imbalances, or a proselytizing mission. if ur not polarizing or doing the others than yeah ur basically faffing about and being inefficient in ur choices.
Why would any density be more meaningful than any other? Why would our octave be any more meaningful than any of the other infinite octaves?
I think our density is more vivid than the other densities.
(12-30-2015, 04:31 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2015, 06:47 PM)Aion Wrote: [ -> ]However, this raises a big question of distortion. Why have things become separate? It's not the veil because there were distortions before the veil so obviously distortion is more fundamental than just being an aspect of 3D free will, especially if Ra calls free will the 'first distortion'. I have looked and it doesn't seem there is anywhere in the Ra Material where Ra clearly defines what they mean by 'distortion'. If anyone knows of any parts, let me know.
So far my best take is that it means that it is a 'twisting' of the fundamental truth and for every distortion it is another 'twist'. Thus, every action begins with that first twist.
I tend to picture distortions as a twist like you do. But I would associate them with love. A good way of undistorting yourself is realizing that your distortions are love or done out of love and then it can be undistorted. Even to detect them you got to love yourself enough to work on yourself. So I think a distortion is something that becomes the basis for an experience that isn't obviously love but still is. When you find the love within there is no more distortions. I don't know if that can always be applied though.
Why would Ra suggest that Logos/Love is the Second Distortion after the First Distortion of Free Will, do you think? It seems to me that the first distortion, according to Ra, is Infinity becoming aware of itself, and then there is a focusing and this focusing they call Love or Logos. Thus the first distortion of intelligent infinity is 'freedom of will of awareness', and this freedom of awareness is then focused through the second distortion, Logos/Love.
However, they never say what they exactly mean by the word 'distortion'. It seems suggested that without any distortion there is no freedom of will of awareness and instead absolute, infinite potential, as Ra suggests there being two parts to intelligent infinity, potential and kinetic. The former they call intelligent infinity, the latter they call intelligent energy.
Thus it appears to me that distortion is to portion or focus upon some potential within infinity (via Love/Logos), thus viewing some finite portion.
As for the questions of meaning, I might suggest that those things which are most meaningful are those which are most contextual for an individual. When something has meaning it simply has coherency.
I'm just going to throw in my 2 cents because I think your conversation is interesting: I think "distortion" was a carefully chosen word by Ra intended to convey that any "appearance" other than absolute infinite and flawless unity is an illusion. Not to imply "illusion" in the sense of "there is really nothing there", as what we are perceiving is real, but not precisely how it really appears without the beer goggles of some perceptual limiting structure which warps, focuses, or translates the raw data/substance of existence. Thus the first distortion, free will, is like the illusion of there being a possibility for something other than infinite flawless unity, and the next distortion, the Logos, or "focusing of infinity or love" is yet another illusion stemming from the first, and then, building further on the distorted illusion or dream of something other than infinite flawless unity, the Logos creates or dreams up primordial matter (which is not "matter" per se, but simply the exploration of "the appearance of projecting substance/energy outwards from self") otherwise known as the "distortion of light".
Or in terms of the Kabbalah, the three distortions are equivalent in my opinion to the concepts of Ain, Ain Soph, and Ain Soph Aur.
Aren't distortions ripples in the Field?
You guys are awesome you know that?
(01-01-2016, 01:35 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: [ -> ]Aren't distortions ripples in the Field?
I guess this could be a way to see it. Though I would picture such distortions as lower distortions like the ones in your own energy field. But maybe on a macroscome level it would be the same.
(12-31-2015, 11:10 PM)Aion Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2015, 04:31 PM)matrix_drumr Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2015, 06:47 PM)Aion Wrote: [ -> ]However, this raises a big question of distortion. Why have things become separate? It's not the veil because there were distortions before the veil so obviously distortion is more fundamental than just being an aspect of 3D free will, especially if Ra calls free will the 'first distortion'. I have looked and it doesn't seem there is anywhere in the Ra Material where Ra clearly defines what they mean by 'distortion'. If anyone knows of any parts, let me know.
So far my best take is that it means that it is a 'twisting' of the fundamental truth and for every distortion it is another 'twist'. Thus, every action begins with that first twist.
I tend to picture distortions as a twist like you do. But I would associate them with love. A good way of undistorting yourself is realizing that your distortions are love or done out of love and then it can be undistorted. Even to detect them you got to love yourself enough to work on yourself. So I think a distortion is something that becomes the basis for an experience that isn't obviously love but still is. When you find the love within there is no more distortions. I don't know if that can always be applied though.
Why would Ra suggest that Logos/Love is the Second Distortion after the First Distortion of Free Will, do you think? It seems to me that the first distortion, according to Ra, is Infinity becoming aware of itself, and then there is a focusing and this focusing they call Love or Logos. Thus the first distortion of intelligent infinity is 'freedom of will of awareness', and this freedom of awareness is then focused through the second distortion, Logos/Love.
However, they never say what they exactly mean by the word 'distortion'. It seems suggested that without any distortion there is no freedom of will of awareness and instead absolute, infinite potential, as Ra suggests there being two parts to intelligent infinity, potential and kinetic. The former they call intelligent infinity, the latter they call intelligent energy.
Thus it appears to me that distortion is to portion or focus upon some potential within infinity (via Love/Logos), thus viewing some finite portion.
As for the questions of meaning, I might suggest that those things which are most meaningful are those which are most contextual for an individual. When something has meaning it simply has coherency.
What if our experience of freewill in 3d is only the result of the law of confusion? I'm really starting to dig this distortion in particular. How much of this confusion are we involved in? How far is our experience driven by confusion? Does this law of confusion affect also higher consciousness, higher densities or even the logos themselves? How does one clear himself out of confusion to a certain extent? Or how does one detect such confusion of another being?
And about meaning being contextual to the individual, I agree. I don't think anything can be more meaningful than anything else if not contextual. Our 3D experience may be more meaningful here for what our awareness is focusing on. But to extend that to beyond anything else than our 3D experience here seems absurd.
I am going to be the annoying person and claim "this is what Ra had to say about oneness."
"I am Ra[...]The Confederation of Planets in the Service of the Infinite Creator has only one important statement. That statement, my friends, as you know, is 'All things, all of life, all of the creation is part of one original thought.'[...]
We are those who are of [The Law of One]. In our vibration the polarities are harmonized, the complexities are simplified, and the paradoxes have their solution. We are one. That is our nature and our purpose[...]
That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.
In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is [The Law of One...]
The Law of One, though beyond the limitations of name, as you call vibratory sound complexes, may be approximated by stating that all things are one, that there is no polarity, no right or wrong, no disharmony, but only identity. All is one, and that one is love/light, light/love, the Infinite Creator[...]
The Law of One states simply that all things are one, that all beings are one[...]When your peoples grasp infinity, then and only then, can the gateway be opened to [The Law of One...]
There are no mistakes under [The Law of One...][The Law of One being universal], there are infinite forms, infinite understandings, but the progression is one[...]"
Well, in the context of Ra, this 3D is the 'density of confusion' and it appears that this confusion is dominant only in this density because it catalyzes one to make the Choice.
I would suggest that confusion is not a 'thing in itself' but is more like an environmental attribute which arises out of particular conditions. Thus, third density conditions induce and enforce confusion. By that token, Ra suggests that to move forward one actually has to embrace one's confusion and to accept that one doesn't understand.
I believe confusion as we understand it was primarily amplified by the veil. Prior to the veil I think this density was perhaps less confusing because entities were not yet complex. It was the complexity which emerged in the Mind/Body/Spirit that went along with the conditions of confusion because complexity appears to resolve itself in to simplicity, but only after becoming very complex.
So, I would suggest that the primary mechanism of 'confusion' is 'self-dissonance' or being unable to decide for oneself who oneself is.
If there is confusion, in accordance to The Law of One, it is all things and affects all things; And that there is no elitism, no separation in the creation as nearly-seemingly professed in this thread.
The 6th dimension would face our 3rd dimension's confusion in empathy and not in pity, not in resistance to its ways and causes.
Lol If all is One isn't elitism in all things and affects all things, as well as separation? Or maybe those parts of infinity don't count. I just find that to be ironic that you in one moment make claims of Oneness where 'everything is everything' and then in the same breath deny attributes to that unity while saying other attributes are universal. This is a very broken view of infinity, in my view, but I probably just don't understand your viewpoint.
Elitism is the denial of unity; In order for Elitism to be in union with itself and profess unity of all that is Elite, it entails it not being a way of unity.
Any apparent paradox here is thus resolved.
How does that resolve the paradox? :/
By the Law of One, that denial of unity exists in all things. If so, how is the denial and acceptance resolved? You're taking about elitism like it's 'separate' from the Unified Whole?
It seeks to be separate, so thus to accept it as it goes, to not infringe upon it, to allow it to profess its form of unity, you must deny it service to what it cannot serve and that is what it does not consider whole.
To force it into universal unity as something to love is to entail it to be unconscious of its true nature: Denial of everything but itself.
To love separation, you must allow it to be separate.
Is it not yet still true that that self that is denied is indeed the only self, true also for those who accept everything?
I accept it as such. I accept the universal hemorrhaging, waste and loss caused by the denial and entropy of the material that the creation does not consider itself.
That's why I am committed to servicing my own polarity as much as possible to ensure those who choose such a self-serving path, truly dare to take the honor/responsibility of absolving the universe of the material it does not consider self in any regard.
I have gone through many visualizations of the wasting away of the creation caused by the negative polarity. It is something I wish to ensure is only caused by the wisest, that truly is able with complete decision able to separate material from the creation that literally had no hope of revival. This does not truly please me but I am called to accept it rather than create further damage: This is how I attempt to inevitably be without polarity.
Wouldn't you think the universe has some way of recycling that apparent 'waste'?
@ Adonai one : I think seeing any kind of waste is just not fully understanding what is happening. How can there be waste if all is one? Aren't the Akashic Record proof that nothing is ever lost?
@ Aion : How does one move foward by embracing confusion if confusion is what makes one unable to move foward? Would making blind choices on the path to simplicity actually be a step foward? Or a step into further confusion?
even the idea of 'unity' is only possible by means of viewing it relative to 'non-unity'.
infinity = insanity
therefore healing seems to be found in the losing of the one infinite self in the symphonies of 'finite' realities.
balance between what we call duality and what we call unity or infinity may be the key to the complexities of mathematical principle. Irrational numbers etc, take phi for example. 'Living' ideas.
I have to admit there is one item that does never get into the records and it pertains to nothing
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science.”
–Einstein, Albert (1879-1955), What I Believe.
Crystallization is the implication of 'multiple points' of self aware infinity functioning in lattice which is cohesive to fulfilling the entire octave of possibility. Its a song and a dance and a flash of the beauty in your eyes because I need the pursuit and I need to heal from/towards the possibility of absolute maximum bestness.
(01-02-2016, 02:57 PM)Fastidious Emanations Wrote: [ -> ]even the idea of 'unity' is only possible by means of viewing it relative to 'non-unity'.
That's what I felt was unclear for some people describing oneness
Quote:Questioner: Are you saying then there are an infinite number of octaves of densities one through eight?
Ra: I am Ra. We wish to establish that we are truly humble messengers of the Law of One. We can speak to you of our experiences and our understandings and teach/learn in limited ways. However, we cannot speak in firm knowledge of all the creations. We know only that they are infinite. We assume an infinite number of octaves.
However, it has been impressed upon us by our own teachers that there is a mystery-clad unity of creation in which all consciousness periodically coalesces and again begins. Thus we can only say we assume an infinite progression though we understand it to be cyclical in nature and, as we have said, clad in mystery.
I would say my philosophy essentially is 'focused' on the Mystery of Mystery itself in that it is the word to me that speaks of all possibilities without reducing itself to any.
That mystery is the most awesome, frustrating, confusing and most beautiful thing ever.
So what does this have to do with sexuality?
But what if it is possible within the possibilities to fully BE that mystery.
Or what if that is the only possibility cuz that's all there ever was.
Where does sexuality and 'energy exchange' come into the equation?
Let alone any possible opposites in any 'dualized' idea.
Relativity?
Fine tuned 'balance' seems to bring us as close to possible without becoming the all that is one.
Its like sure anything is possible, but to have 'something' tangible like 'experiences' I needs to plumb the mystery As if though I were not it.
I need to know as if i know not.
When all is known, the pain of infinite insanity is the big bang that begins the cycle again.
That pain we call the mystery.
And that seems to be able to explain the origin of desire- the substrate for action.
Mystery attracting mystery finitely utilizing subtle pulsations of 'energy' (kinetic knowingness?- a throwback/forward spikes through the continuum of memory or time)
Peace and power
milk and honey XD
(01-03-2016, 04:40 AM)Aion Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:However, it has been impressed upon us by our own teachers that there is a mystery-clad unity of creation in which all consciousness periodically coalesces and again begins. Thus we can only say we assume an infinite progression though we understand it to be cyclical in nature and, as we have said, clad in mystery.
I would say my philosophy essentially is 'focused' on the Mystery of Mystery itself in that it is the word to me that speaks of all possibilities without reducing itself to any.
I always wonder how 3rd density beings would experience / remember that collalescense. I'm guessing we would experience something profound, but most would not remember due to the veil / being unable to interpret the experience.
(12-29-2015, 04:41 PM)Night Owl Wrote: [ -> ]I noticed there seem to be two different perspectives about oneness on the forum. It flies under the radar but it creates much distortions. I feel sometimes if it would have been discussed before other discussions it would have eased comprehension between members. Some seem to understand oneness as a unified duality while others seems to see it more as a single infinite multiplicity. I tend to see it more as the second one.
For me, even though a unified duality can be seen as a positive thing because of unity being the goal to reach, it still implies a division or some kind of hierarchical level that must be reached to be unified as if everything isn't already unified. This doesn't make sense to me as it implies everything isn't already one. It leaves too much room for right/wrong, correctness/incorrectness and things like unjustified or meaningless experiences. I feel this also doesn't make you responsible for your actions. It justifies playing the victim because in this version everyone can have his/her version of what creates unity according to one's ego.
The single infinite multiplicity rather sees everything as already one single thing that explores multiple facets of itself but yet is still one single thing. To me this makes much more sense because it implies everything is already interconnected to the one and everything has a reason and can be explained positively or related to oneness already. In this version there can be no unjustified suffering. This approach seems to take more responsability for it's action and doesn't have room for some kind of victim state. I feel it is more resonant with the LOO.
What are your thoughts on this matter?
Agreed. If you don't feel unity your seeing duality.