I was wondering since I have not found the information myself. Why was there a switch from the Ra material to Q'uo?
I found Ra's transcripts to always, well almost always, give a direct answer that although confusing at times, it got to the point.
Reading some of the Q'uo material just seems to drag on without really answering the question given. It seems mostly religious and repetitive whereas Ra seemed to cut off repeated requests many times.
I remember a few times reading his answer as "this has already been discussed" etc.
I don't want anyone upset with my query, just a general question as to why the switch and also are they of the same group of transmitters? If it hurts anyone's feelings for me to ask this please just look past it as I am just trying to compare the philosophies given and notice that Q'uo material does not resonate at all with me.
(09-15-2010, 12:55 AM)Deekun Wrote: [ -> ]I was wondering since I have not found the information myself. Why was there a switch from the Ra material to Q'uo?
I found Ra's transcripts to always, well almost always, give a direct answer that although confusing at times, it got to the point.
Reading some of the Q'uo material just seems to drag on without really answering the question given. It seems mostly religious and repetitive whereas Ra seemed to cut off repeated requests many times.
I remember a few times reading his answer as "this has already been discussed" etc.
I don't want anyone upset with my query, just a general question as to why the switch and also are they of the same group of transmitters? If it hurts anyone's feelings for me to ask this please just look past it as I am just trying to compare the philosophies given and notice that Q'uo material does not resonate at all with me.
The answer is a somewhat long one and could probably be answered better by someone other than me. However, since I found the LOO material in the early 1980s while it was still being produced, I'll give a short answer. Ra was only channeled for a few years and was attuned to the presence of Carla, Jim, and Don. With Don's death in "1984?", the purely Ra channelings ceased. Quo channelings are not from trance like the LOO channelings were. They come from 3 social-memory complexes, a 4th density one (Hattonn), a 5th density (Latwii), and a 6th density (Ra). Like you, I've never felt nearly as drawn to the Quo channelings.
Q'uo is a 'lighter' from of channeling. If I'm not mistaken, different people in the group would channel Q'uo in turns during the sessions. Ra was a different kettle of fish, as they say, attuned to the specific energies of Carla, Jim and Don.
The addition of Hatonn and Latwii is a big influence, as their messages were more emotional. Have a read of The Brown Notebook if you're interested.
It's also worth mentioning that with lighter trances, the personality of the channeller has more influence over the messages, flavouring them.
I do still very much enjoy Q'uo's messages; an invaluable source of inspiration.
L&L
Ah I see, thank you for your responses. I have also gone over some other Ra material which was not channeled by Carla, Don and Jim and it did not seem the same, it felt inconsistent. And yes, I noticed the emotional side the Q'uo, I think it may be what throws me off about their message.
(09-15-2010, 06:24 PM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]It's also worth mentioning that with lighter trances, the personality of the channeller has more influence over the messages, flavouring them.
I do still very much enjoy Q'uo's messages; an invaluable source of inspiration.
Agreed, on both counts. I find the Q'uo info to be much more practical and related to day-to-day human experiences, whereas the Ra contact forms the philosophical foundation.
I've gotten tremendous value from the Q'uo sessions, but I have more trust in the Ra material as a source of information. I find both equally valuable in their own respective ways.
Deekun, Carla describes that after the Ra contact she specifically asked to have a contact that would not require her to be in trance; for the highest contact she could receive while maintaining stable consciousness. The trance work really took a toll on her health.
David Wilcox has mentioned that the Ra he contacts is David's own higher self, and not necessarily the same Ra that conversed with Don in the L/L Research books.
So much for what others have said for sure. Now for my own suppositions.
I think there are several other channelers who contact entities who give Ra as their name. They may or may not be the same Ra, just as we might encounter different people named John Smith. With the variety of channelers, these messages also may or may not be as accurate. I find it most helpful, when I encounter these messages, to consider what they have to say on their own terms. Once I get their point, only then to see if they also integrate with the LLR material.
I feel that Ra's goal was to convey as much high level philosophy as possible, given whatever questions Don wanted to ask. Thus the comments about questions that don't particularly matter but are harmless, and the "alignment of the accoutrements" code and so on. Just like a doctoral study session, there is no time to waste.
I feel the Q'uo's goal is to provide loving encouragement through every day life, with applied techniques backed by enough philosophy to understand the principle. The Q'uo sessions have different people present on different days. Thus the more freewheeling style, adapted to the particular people and questions of each session. This is more like a teacher who does a "general public Q&A." This kind of session is open to even unsophisticated people, and has no urgent pressure to get out advanced information if the audience is not ready for it.
(09-16-2010, 10:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Ra = Don
Q'uo = Carla
I'd agree that Ra is more logical like Don, but was channeled by an unconscious Carla.
I wonder if Ra could be channeled again - and what he/she/it would say about our present time, and what would be the requirements of such a channeling.
(09-18-2010, 06:09 AM)Wander-Man Wrote: [ -> ] (09-16-2010, 10:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Ra = Don
Q'uo = Carla
I'd agree that Ra is more logical like Don, but was channeled by an unconscious Carla.
I wonder if Ra could be channeled again - and what he/she/it would say about our present time, and what would be the requirements of such a channeling.
Ra was speaking through Carla using a narrow band channel. This required some extensive tuning to get such a 'clear' message.
The adept channels in conscious mode able at will to 'supress' the 'chatter' of the mind and tune in to the energy stamp of the group soul. The only physical requirement would be to close the eyes.
This could be better termed as a broad band channel.
This instrument would not call this type of contact 'channelling' .
Many Confederation wanderers are working together with their Soul Groups (at various levels) at this moment, the Ra Social Memory Complex being just one example. They are all very much active behind the scenes at the present time.
Regarding the requirements of channelling in general I refer to Carlas work and offer a quote (paraphrase) from Ra.
Stillness of Self as desired by the Self at a constant rate.
In this case of this instrument the Ra contact is requested from the Higher Self to the Guide. The Guide is of the Soul Group.
This Instrument has 'published' contents of these contacts only on rare occasions and due to reasons of free will / forum rules shall not offer 'channeled' material on this site.
Thanks to the OP's question for allowing me to offer this answer.
As always should my words not resonate with your path pay them no further attention.
Love & Light
(09-18-2010, 07:43 AM)Ashim Wrote: [ -> ]This Instrument has 'published' contents of these contacts only on rare occasions and due to reasons of free will / forum rules shall not offer 'channeled' material on this site.
When the new forum area is open for channeled material outside LLR, I hope you will be able to share or link. That should address the forum rules concern, although I don't know if a free will issue might remain.
Meanwhile thank you for explaining more of the process of channeling.
This confused me.... so we are not allowed to link from other places or something?
Deekun, I'm not a moderator so maybe one can explain more.
As I understand it, we can briefly mention outside channeling. But it should not be the focus of conversation here.
The moderators are working on a new forum area where we could discuss outside channeled material. Their big concern is that anything people bring in outside of LLR would be consistently useful, and not lead anyone astray. They haven't yet figured out how the rules will work for that new area. We can expect some more announcements about all this any week.
Ashim, when the new forum area is up I hope you will be able to share or link some more of your material. Meanwhile I thank you for describing more of the process of channeling.
Ah I see, it's my fault for not going over the forum rules :p Most of the times they have the same cut and paste "be respectful, don't troll, don't argue, etc."
That's here too but there are a few twists.
Dear friends,
Lightning, you are correct, the Ra contact ended in 1984 with the death of Don Elkins. In his absence, the Ra contact, unfortunately (from my Ra-hungry standpoint), could not be resumed.
I've considered the differences and similarities between the two contacts, Ra & Q’uo. One of the first ways to differentiate the two is as Ashim was pointing out, narrow band vs broad (?) band.
In the case of the Ra contact, the transmission of information/energy was a narrow band one, that is it was extremely focused, extremely coherent, and extremely tight, necessitating that the consciousness of the instrument be out of the body. It was a magical event in the truest sense of the word, requiring ritual protection and greater fastidiousness in walking in the light, leaving the L/L group (Don, Carla, and Jim) little margin for error
What makes the Ra contact so singular, whether in comparison to Q'uo or virtually every other source of information available on this planet, is that we hear directly from Ra with little to no human interference, as if they are in the room with us. Ra as Ra - as a unified planetary consciousness, beyond polarity, outside of space and time, existing in the experience of unbroken unity - is a pure source of information very "close" (for lack of a better term) to the undistorted infinite Creator, in my understanding, at least.
Q'uo, on the other hand, is broad band because it is channeled by an instrument that is present in their own physical vehicle - not only present, but awake and aware of Q'uo coming through them. Q'uo, therefore, is necessarily colored by the human instrument. The skilled instrument, of course, strives to reduce their impact on the information as much as possible, but the coloration is unavoidable. This however does not, in my understanding, mitigate against the polarity and overall message which Q’uo has to share. If one were to make a study of Q’uo channelings from their beginning in 1986 (I believe) to present day, one would find a stunningly consistent message over a span of 24 years and multiple instruments. (The same can be said of all the conscious Confederation channeling over the history of L/L.)
I would agree with some of your assessments regarding focused versus unfocused. Q’uo certainly has a focus, but it is much broader than Ra’s, and they can be a bit rambling sometimes. :-)
Ra, to me, is concentrated wisdom, pure, distilled, and reduced to the most potent and profound form that outwardly communicated information can assume. Q’uo, on the other hand, is diluted wisdom. The same set of basic principles are there, but it is thinned out somewhat by the addition of the water of the instrument’s conscious mind-receiver.
A metaphor that somewhat conveys this same understanding: alcohol.
Silence is 200 proof. There is no more potent a communication and understanding and experiencing of truth than silence itself, not necessarily outward silence but the one-pointed silence of the mind. Silence is fire to the wood of the soul, transforming that which it contacts through flame into itself. There is no higher/deeper a truth on this planet, either experienced within or communicated, than silence. Where words, thoughts, images, concepts - indeed, where all forms do not go, silence IS, it is a doorway into the infinite.
Continuing with the metaphor of alcohol, let's arbitrarily say, then, that the highest concentration of "truth" that outwardly communicated wisdom could take is, 140 proof - it contains "truth" but is not quite the pure thing. Even at this most high concentration, in the end, no matter how amazing and universe-shaking, the Law of One books are only the finger pointing at the moon, they are no match for silence, though they, like all great teachings, can be of inestimable aid to the entity seeking silence.
Q’uo is, just as arbitrarily, 100 proof. The same core truth is present, but more watered down, meaning that, if it were actually alcohol, you’d have to drink more of it to get the same effect. Though even in lesser quantities it will still give you one hell of a punch. : )
This is a really dumb metaphor with more limitations than uses, and these things of course cannot be quantified, but the metaphor serves to illustrate the relationship between these various grades of understanding and communication.
To me, Q’uo is much more inspirational than they are informational. Inspiration, let me tell you, is a much needed ally and resource on the spiritual path. Q’uo encourages the seeker to reach higher, to continue the quest, to have faith, to open the heart, to trust life, to accept what is, etc. Making a habit of reading their words is like going on a healthy diet for the mind, it lifts the seeker’s perspective from the thinking-traps of the everyday life to an empowering vision wherein all things are one in a universe which is working for, not against, the seeker.
The concrete foundations of my own path are made of the Q’uo material. Early on in my training, I would spend days immersed in the ocean of the L/L transcripts, rewiring my mental patterns (it seems) to see self and world from the Confederation perspective, embedding the seeds of their principles into the soil of my being until such time that later experience would water and nurture their growth. Those sprouts continue to grow into the present. (Pun intended.)
It’s been some years since I was passionate about the practice of reading Q’uo. I still think the material top-notch, an endless source of inspiration and beauty, but as my path has evolved, I have required more concentrated and focused sources of information. Q’uo however continues to have a very dear spot in my heart because their message is woven into the fabric of my seeking and self-understanding.
Love/Light,
GLB
Gary, thank you so much for the perspective. Your language and metaphors capture the ways I've also felt about this material, but not been able to put into words. Thanks for all this forum provides, helping all of us to enjoy our mental diet, and to encourage each other in seeking our spiritual growth.
(09-22-2010, 06:49 PM)Questioner Wrote: [ -> ]Gary, thank you so much for the perspective.
And Questioner, thanks so much for not getting on me for the creation of the experimental sub-forum. ; ) I saw it mentioned in this thread and I apologize to you and to any other eager to see it manifest, but always there is too much to do and too little of me to do it!
If all goes well, my goal is to digest the replies that you and others offered to the "tuning" thread (about how to best implement new sub-forum), and draft the guidelines for the sub-forum before sending it off to Bring4th admin team to review and approve.
Maybe then it will be up and running by Saturday. Or Monday. Or June, 2011. = )
Much love!
No rush. I think it's more important to have the functionality to ask Carla questions for her new radio show.
Eventually we will have perfect spiritual unity, sharing all we have learned and experienced from all our teachers.
Meanwhile, if you happen to add a forum some time before Harvest, we can yak at each other here.
I'm wondering about the apostrophe in the name. All I could find about it is this:
September 11, 2010:
"...the apostrophe is our very own!"
I'm wondering if someone can tell me what they think that means/implies...or either if they know what's with the apostrophe.
(01-21-2016, 03:28 AM)isis Wrote: [ -> ]I'm wondering about the apostrophe in the name. All I could find about it is this:
September 11, 2010:
"...the apostrophe is our very own!"
I'm wondering if someone can tell me what they think that means/implies...or either if they know what's with the apostrophe.
I think the term Q'uo is a carefully chosen abbreviation of the name Quetzalcoatl. That's what the apostrophe signifies.
Possibly, but if Q'uo were Quetzalcoatl or whichever S-M-C overseeing South America that Ra mentioned a few times, why wouldn't he just come out and say it? Also, that's not really how apostrophes work.
To me, that answer sounds more like a joke. Names are considered totally arbitrary by entities on that scale, and could be chosen for totally idiosyncratic reasons. For all we know, he's making a pun based on what the vibratory complex "sounds" like in 6D which we could never comprehend. Or his quirky little equivalent to those useless umlauts heavy metal bands love.
Either way, I doubt it's of any real importance or he wouldn't have given such a flippant answer.
(01-21-2016, 04:33 AM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote: [ -> ]Possibly, but if Q'uo were Quetzalcoatl or whichever S-M-C overseeing South America that Ra mentioned a few times, why wouldn't he just come out and say it? Also, that's not really how apostrophes work.
To me, that answer sounds more like a joke. Names are considered totally arbitrary by entities on that scale, and could be chosen for totally idiosyncratic reasons. For all we know, he's making a pun based on what the vibratory complex "sounds" like in 6D which we could never comprehend. Or his quirky little equivalent to those useless umlauts heavy metal bands love.
Either way, I doubt it's of any real importance or he wouldn't have given such a flippant answer.
An apostrophe signifies omission of characters. What's wrong with that?
'
What other Group who just seemed to be hanging around in the area at the time who's initials so conveniently match would you suggest then?
I'm with the feathery serpent and the Maya / Aztec being our Q'uo. Maybe they use expensive broadband and are just economical with words.
Has anyone actually asked them about this?
(01-21-2016, 11:17 AM)Ashim Wrote: [ -> ]An apostrophe signifies omission of characters. What's wrong with that?
Well, strictly speaking, if he were abbreviating
quetzalc
oatl, that would be Qu'o. The apostrophe is in the wrong place.
Quote:What other Group who just seemed to be hanging around in the area at the time who's initials so conveniently match would you suggest then?
This assumes the name was chosen for reasons which relate to us or was intended to convey information. Plus, we have no real way of knowing how many groups are hanging around the Earth making themselves useful, even if they aren't taking a leadership\oversight role like Ra is.
Also, I just now looked up the article where Q'uo talks about the name, and he even directly suggests it's kind of a joke. Just a
Latin joke.
Quote:We are those of Q’uo, and, my brother, we were indeed making what could kindly and charitably be called a pun. We apologize for our frivolous nature. The word “Quo” is indeed a part of the language of Latin, which is much conjugated. However, my brother, the apostrophe is our very own! May we ask if there is a final query at this time?
So if you were right, Q'uo would be bordering on downright deceptive here. But since "quo" in Latin is a question-word that could mean "Who?" "Whither?" "Wherefore?" or "To what end?" (among others, depending on context) it sounds to me like it's a deliberate non-name. Like Doctor Who.
That said, I
do think the basic questions about the group that oversaw South America are worthy ones, and it's a topic I wish would be answered somehow at some point. I've wondered repeatedly why Ra was so terse on the subject, and seemed to carefully-avoid giving any specifics about that entity. It's certainly an intriguing mystery, but I doubt Q'uo is the answer - and even if he were, he's apparently going to some lengths to not talk about it.
(Given how bloodthirsty the South/Central American tribes ended up, maybe he feels even worse about how his efforts went than Ra does about his own mistakes? Not to mention that the European invasion pretty much ended his efforts and rendered them largely irrelevant to humanity going forward.)
(01-22-2016, 01:27 PM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote: [ -> ]Well, strictly speaking, if he were abbreviating quetzalcoatl, that would be Qu'o. The apostrophe is in the wrong place.
I thought it would be Qu'o'.
(01-22-2016, 01:27 PM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016, 11:17 AM)Ashim Wrote: [ -> ]An apostrophe signifies omission of characters. What's wrong with that?
Well, strictly speaking, if he were abbreviating quetzalcoatl, that would be Qu'o. The apostrophe is in the wrong place.
Quote:What other Group who just seemed to be hanging around in the area at the time who's initials so conveniently match would you suggest then?
This assumes the name was chosen for reasons which relate to us or was intended to convey information. Plus, we have no real way of knowing how many groups are hanging around the Earth making themselves useful, even if they aren't taking a leadership\oversight role like Ra is.
Also, I just now looked up the article where Q'uo talks about the name, and he even directly suggests it's kind of a joke. Just a Latin joke.
Quote:We are those of Q’uo, and, my brother, we were indeed making what could kindly and charitably be called a pun. We apologize for our frivolous nature. The word “Quo” is indeed a part of the language of Latin, which is much conjugated. However, my brother, the apostrophe is our very own! May we ask if there is a final query at this time?
So if you were right, Q'uo would be bordering on downright deceptive here. But since "quo" in Latin is a question-word that could mean "Who?" "Whither?" "Wherefore?" or "To what end?" (among others, depending on context) it sounds to me like it's a deliberate non-name. Like Doctor Who.
That said, I do think the basic questions about the group that oversaw South America are worthy ones, and it's a topic I wish would be answered somehow at some point. I've wondered repeatedly why Ra was so terse on the subject, and seemed to carefully-avoid giving any specifics about that entity. It's certainly an intriguing mystery, but I doubt Q'uo is the answer - and even if he were, he's apparently going to some lengths to not talk about it.
(Given how bloodthirsty the South/Central American tribes ended up, maybe he feels even worse about how his efforts went than Ra does about his own mistakes? Not to mention that the European invasion pretty much ended his efforts and rendered them largely irrelevant to humanity going forward.)
I still think it's them though.
That's an interesting theory, but I believe Q'uo says they are a 5th density entity that is blended with Hatonn as the 4D analogue and Ra as 6D. I always assumed that Q'uo was 5th density Ra, basically. And Ra speaks of the Quetzalcoatl group as separate from itself. But, who knows?