Bring4th

I've long felt that awe inspiring stories, such as Tolkien's Lord of the Rings narrative, affect us so strongly because they deliberately, or as is probably more often the case, accidentally resonate with the deep archetypal structures of our societal consciousness complex. This is is a clip from one of my favorite cartoon adaptations of the Lord of the Rings.

It's titled "Return of the King" it was produced in 1980.

---

---

The bearer of the ring, the wearer of the ring
Stands on the very brink of fate;
Staring into eyes of darkness and despair
That rise and shrink with hate.

The bearer of the ring, the wearer of the ring,
He hears a voice compelling him;
Filling him with thoughts that echo in his mind
It should be telling him.

Beware, the power is a power never known.
Beware, the power that was simple has now grown.
Beware, O, bearer of the ring,
The final power has yet to be shown!

The bearer of the ring, the wearer of the ring,
Through voices tempting to resist,
Must recall the quest to end this darkest age
That mortal death has kissed.

The bearer of the ring, the wearer of the ring,
Beware who wears the ring!

The bearer of the ring, the wearer of the ring,
He hears a voice compelling him;
Filling him with thoughts that echo in his mind
It should be telling him.

Beware, the power is a power never known.
Beware, the power that was simple has now grown.
Beware, O, bearer of the ring,
The final power has yet to be shown!

---

The journey to mount doom to destroy the One Ring is an allegory analogous to the Fool's Journey. We are all on our own sort of inner quest to 'destroy the one ring'. The journey to mount doom is the journey towards making The Choice. The choice is whether to wear the ring, or destroy the ring. But along the journey one must keep the power of the ring at bay. You must become a "ring bearer" -- it is no easy quest. The only power that is a match to the power of the one ring is the power to resist the temptations of the ring. The metaphor is rife with interesting symbolism. The ring represents the temptation towards pure selfishness. Essentially, it represents the Ego. How apropos that it is a golden color, the perfect analog representation of the solar plexus center. As long as the ring is not adorning the finger, and is hung about the neck over the heart center, the power of the heart (the power of love/compassion) and the will to resist wearing the ring can keep the darkness at bay.

---

Ra: The temptations are offered by those negative entities of what you would call your inner planes. These, shall we say, dark angels have been impressed by the service-to-self path offered by those which have come through quarantine from days of old and these entities, much like your angelic presences of the positive nature, are ready to move in thought within the inner planes of this planetary influence working from time/space to space/time.

---

Ra: The fifth density sees the difficulties posed by the light and in this way directs entities of this vibration to the seeking of targets of opportunity such as this one. If fourth-density temptations, shall we say, towards distortion of ego, etc., are not successful the fifth-density entity then thinks in terms of the removal of light.

---

As one approaches the crack of doom, and is faced with the real choice to actually destroy the one ring, forever, the temptations towards using The Power of the ring for selfish enforcement of ones will on the world become power upon power greater. The fact of the matter is: the ring does not want to be destroyed and will do anything in its power to avoid it (even if it has to kill you -- i.e. when you turn on the ego it will also turn on you). So it promises you absolute power, and if one chooses that, one then identifies purely with the ego, and is then 'wearing' the ring.

Notice how in the above clip Frodo gets to the point of destroying the ring, and at the last minute the temptations of the ring grow too strong for his will and love to resist. He tosses back his head in grim laughter, choosing darkness over light. In kabbalah, if you get to the gateway, and can't let go of your ego, and attempt to cross the "abyss" without purifying yourself, you become a "demon", which is a poetic way of articulating the idea of an unholy being that has the unfortunate combination of great power and zero compassion.

When one puts on the ring, it silences the heart center absolutely, which gives one a great deal of non-contradicted dark power. Also, appreciate the symbolism of turning invisible upon putting on the ring (i.e making the choice). The implication being that when one puts on the ring, the Light no longer shines upon one, thus, one is no longer visible. You become 'lost to the Light' -- A being of the shadow realm.

"Must recall the quest to end this darkest age
That mortal death has kissed."

So the question inherent at the end of the fools journey is this: are you a ring bearer, or a ring wearer?

There is of course, far more symbolism to the story than this, but these are the current thoughts I have time to share. Hopefully someone found them interesting.

As the kids would say in the linguistic parlance of the day: "Cool story bro."

Are you familiar with the Hero's Journey concept?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero's_journey

Deep man.

Thank you for sharing.

Yeah, if you're interested in archetypal myths, Campbell's "Hero With a Thousand Faces" is pretty much required reading. It also influenced a huge number of works that came afterwards, including Star Wars and First Blood (Rambo). The original First Blood novel, in fact, was written by a professor who was curious if a modern-day hero myth told using Campbell's formula would be popular. And, well . . .

Also, yay for the 80s Tolkien cartoons. I grew up on those. I'm still so annoyed that Peter Jackson almost entirely eliminated Sam's Quest from his version of ROTK, considering it's one of the best segments of the entire trilogy.

"Get to the choppa".

No wait, that was Arnold.

Tolkien is one of my favorites! I enjoy the fantasy and adventure. The depiction of the mages are great, with their reserved wise use of power and guidance and service for their charges. The elves and their purity and harmony with Creation.

The stories of King Authur and his Noble Knights also resonate deeply with me. At least the ones in Bulfinch's Mythology do. There's the story of Sir Gwayne and his glimpse of the holy grail as he was passed out exhausted after a battle at the side of the road of a chapel.

Ha! high five, anagogy. This was on my "to do" list but you have beaten me to it. And I have to admit to that you have done it better than I could have 

Ring bearing sounds more useful than ring wearing.  And yet still, I do not know.  I do not want to use such power, but if I'd have to for survival, I probably would be a wearer if even temporarily.

I have only watched the Peter Jackson movies but the lord of the rings, as well as the hobbit, both strike me as being very very special and containing profound philosophies and ideas in them, even though I can't exactly articulate them.  It is more of a feeling than an intellectual understanding.  I appreciate those who can translate those feelings into eloquent words though, like you have done anagogy.  Another movie which has left a strong energetic impression on me, which I feel is packed with spiritual understanding and guidance, is Pinocchio.     

It is only my opinion, but I think the story of LOTR is the highest vibrational story found on earth at the moment. I suspect it must be a recurrent archetypal story elsewhere than earth, it just seems like it's deep rooted into the collective mind. Almost every archetypes can found if not all of them. Thanks for sharing. If you do have more archeypal analogies like this one I'd be very interested to hear them.

I like how the world is sang into form in the Tolkien's universe cosmology.

(03-13-2017, 09:54 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]I like how the world is sang into form in the Tolkien's universe cosmology.

The Silmarillion is definitely a profound book, like most of Tolkien's books. 

Well technically Tolkien never wrote the Silmarillion, it was a collection of all his notes and background stories which were compiled by his family and released post-humously.

I just realised now that this adaptation is not the same as the one based on the fellowship of the ring. I've seen the first but it ends somewhere during the two towers and the project for adapting the rest of the books was abandoned. I didn't realised this existed although it's essentially not related. Wikipedia says Warner bros just kind of advertised it as if it was some kind of continutation although there is a huge gap in between and it's not the same producer.. I'm definitely gonna watch the return of the king now. Thanks for sharing.

The really funny thing is that if you compare the Rankin-Bass cartoon version of ROTK with Peter Jackson's original theatrical cut of ROTK, they have an astoundingly FEW scenes in common. The focus of each adaptation is so totally different that it led to a totally different selection of scenes too.

I've just watched it and I can say after having been a little disapointed by the fellowship of the ring adaptation, this one was a lot better and I quite enjoyed it. I can see peter jackson has probably inspired himself from many scenes and designs. Although the representations of characters and their dialogue are very different, some of the camera shots seems very inspired by some of the animated scenes. The way gondor and mount doom are represented is quite similar for exemple. The black ships, the scene where an orc leader find Frodo and Sam and order them to join the ranks or when Sam climb cirith ungol, Denethor's dementia speach with gandalf, the nazghul king presentation against Gandalf. Each of these scenes share very similar way to portray the visuals even though there are very noticeable differences.

There are some weird things though like when the witch king fly above the pelenor fields on a dark flying horse but when he's aproaching to enter the city he's now on a dragon....

There's also a scene where Frodo becomes kind of virtuous and strong by holding the ring and cast away gollum out of pure willpower while the ring has been weakening him to near death for a very long time and attracting gollum to take the ring.... it didnt make a lot of sense to me but it's not so bad that it would ruin the movie, it's just a bit weird.

Also the story completely skips shelob's lair and it seems like it's been way too much of a piece of cake for sam to reach cirith ungol but I suppose they had to keep the story short for an animated movie.

I found the analogy to "frodo of the nine fingers" very interesting. The fact that he's been entangled to the nine nazghul after he's been wounded by the blade of the witch king and ends up short of a finger after gollum tear off his finger that holds the ring is very methaphorical. I'm not sure if it's in the book but I'm sure there's no reference to "frodo of the nine fingers" in peter jackson's trilogy and I never thought about it before, it's very clever. It's like he's got one finger for each king of men that sauron corrupted and which he's entangled to, and the finger who's been bound to the ring of sauron himself is destroyed with the ring.

I will watch the hobbit adaptation tomorrow since this one convinced me of it's worth and it's the same producers.

Fan reactions to the R-B Return of the King are... mixed. However, their version of the Hobbit is generally viewed quite positively. It has to cut some events from the book for time, notably Beorn, the sleeping river, and the entire Arkenstone subplot. However, it still captures the general tone\vibe of the book quite well, and its adaptations of Tolkien's songs are very nice. I've always really liked its setting of 'Roads Go Ever On'.

It's actually a bit impressive how well they did with it, considering they had to cram the book into about 75 minutes to fit it into a 90-minute network TV timeslot. But I've always wished they'd been able to target a two-hour slot instead, since that probably would have let them get in the main material that got cut. Either way, it still remains (imo) a much more watchable adaptation than the bloated mess of a trilogy that Jackson made. :-/

OP, your posts are usually, IMHO, the most insightful on the board, but I feel like you're a little bit off-base here.

My problem with your post is the same problem I have with self-proclaimed RHPers in general: you jump right from someone desiring "power" and having an "ego", to "zero compassion" and the idea that anyone who wants to develop themselves is "evil". And even among the "negatively" oriented, I don't think it's a good idea to shut off the heart complex, nor do I desire such a thing.

I get the idea all this is propagated by deluded STS forces to keep one from developing the self, because it's based on a very important misconception, as is a LOT of Western occultism. The LHP is about giving birth to a universe, creating a new and separate dimension that draws patterns from other realities and may or may not rely on as well as support other realities structurally, but is also structurally separate to some degree. Materialists aren't actually LHP, because trying to control anothers' reality is pointless when you can control your own.

If you're fifth density or above with your own little reality-bubble, what use would you have for controlling someone or something outside of the self when you can simply copy the pattern into the self? Why would you need to steal someone else's CD when you can just torrent the FLAC files off of TPB? So some of these LHP groups could be likened to violent cartels revolving around CD theft because they never discovered the internet.

I think that Ra says that negatively oriented social memory complexes are, at some point, forced into positive configuration when they come near the One, which makes sense, considering that anything based on separation would start to break down into its constituent pieces, as anything will if you heat it up to a high enough temperature.

But that also goes for your "positive" individuality, your idea of the "I", and, indeed, your own ideas and doctrines of "compassion" and what is "right" or "wrong" and who does or doesn't "deserve" this or that. At that point, you're pure energy, pure STO, pure fuel for the realities of those who chose to develop themselves. If, at that point, you do have any consciousness, it will be unlike anything you could conceive of as a human, and would include a deep compassion for all creation, even the predatory aspects.

You see this with Ra, who hasn't even achieved 7th density, and Ra's unwillingness to say "thou shalt not" or use terminology that is morally biased.

I like the idea of compassion, but, at the same time, I feel like when you start moving away from the perceptions of others (whatever path you may be on), you eventually start to realize how human morality is formed by the human psyche and how illusory it is, and while I'd like to end suffering and give all beings the existence they desire, I'd like to end suffering and give all beings the existence they desire - there are no strings attached to that, and because of the example of the CD and the FLAC files above, I see no reason why there should be.

This seems to put me at odds with moral crusaders who feel they need to hurt people and increase suffering in answer to some perceived injustice or another. And, sure, I experience that feeling myself, a LOT, but I call it what it is - selfishness and vengeance to make myself feel better - and then let it pass. I don't delude myself into thinking that it's a "mature and rational decision that needs to be made" because "something needs to be done". In a truly limitless reality, there is no need to limit others.

Most RHP followers are STS of the worst sort in disguise, fooling and denying power even to themselves because of the deluded idea that infinity doesn't mean infinity.

Just finished the hobbit now. Quite a pleasant experience. I must say I totally understand that the reviews were more positive than ROTK as it seems the animation format is more adequate for this story. And I also prefer this story without poor hollywood humor, tauriel love stoy and the very disneyesque goblin song from the jackson trilogy. I still enjoyed the jackson trilogy without these segments but he probably should have done 2 3h movies instead of 3 movies, the pace and scenes would have flowed better. Anyway I highly recommend the 1977 hobbit movie.

I'll love to see my book as a movie in a higher density. I've put the work into it already.
I made a warlock a positive being in it.
But yeah, I like the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Haven't read the Simarillion.

(03-11-2017, 11:21 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]are you a ring bearer, or a ring wearer?

I am the ring.