Bring4th

Full Version: The Law of One, minus the space opera
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Wanted to get your opinion on something, folks. I'm open to any reaction to this.

For the past ten years of my involvement with the Law of One material, I have often found it difficult to inspire curiosity in people whom I think would be open to the non-transient, core spiritual message so well represented in the sessions. This has nothing to do with what I (admittedly imperfectly) judge to be their resonance with the Law of One in its simplicity. Instead, it is the extent to which the spiritually valuable material is mixed in with what I call "space opera" details - things like having to explain that the entity bringing this through is called "Ra", having to justify the whole UFO and exo-political Confederation drama, etc. These are things that are difficult to accept on their own if somebody is not predisposed to UFOs, conspiracies, etc. Given that they are often transient matters, would it not make sense to formulate a version of the spiritual material in a condensed format?

As I re-read the Law of One for the first time in years, I really do go back and forth on this. There is a sense in which a lot of the "space opera" details inspire a sense of mystery which, properly balanced, need not be distracting at all. The issue is the degree to which this information is accessible to somebody not familiar with the ancillary issues. The primary goal in the original contact was fidelity to the transmission and total transparency of the experimental conditions. I am not challenging the value of the source material one iota; I am wondering whether the presentation of the original sessions is always the best way to encounter the material.

Example: I read the study guide before ever reading the sessions themselves. This was, in my opinion, of unspeakable advantage to my appreciation for the sessions when I did encounter them. But the study guide uses all the elements of the sessions with equal weight, I'd say. It's a study guide to the sessions. What I'm talking about is a study guide or commentary on the concepts themselves.

I do wonder if there's any way we could condense this material in a more readable and immediately useful way. It may not be viable or possible without something too important being lost. It's something I'm contemplating as I move forward in my rereading. Essentially, even something like the well known study guide could be refashioned in this way. The overall progression of the sessions, speaking VERY broadly, is to progress from more interest in transient matters to less interest. What would be interesting would be a study guide or companion commentary that reversed this: instead of focusing on the transient matters first and getting less transient, focus on the non-transient matters first and bring in the transient "space opera" details as more fundamental matters are developed (if at all).

The problem here is that, in reformulating Ra's messages without many of the examples of the more fantastic details, there is significant opportunity for distortion, through personally filtering the material in precisely the way those of L/L did not, at least not consciously.

Perhaps what Carla did with "Law of One 101" was the right way to go about this: if you are going to restate the Law of One in your own words (i.e. channel the Law of One from yourself, so to speak) you might as well at least be up front about its personal character. Carla has always demonstrated talent in using examples from her life to frame her understanding of these matters. Maybe what I'm doing is trying to convince myself to write something like this, but I feel like I'd need to approach the degree of dedication to this material that Jim and Carla have achieved before I'd have anything useful.

Anyway, this is something that's been on my mind for years, and I was just interested if anybody had feedback.
(01-21-2011, 01:16 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]Example: I read the study guide before ever reading the sessions themselves. This was, in my opinion, of unspeakable advantage to my appreciation for the sessions when I did encounter them. But the study guide uses all the elements of the sessions with equal weight, I'd say. It's a study guide to the sessions. What I'm talking about is a study guide or commentary on the concepts themselves.

this is a matter of spirit. you should have taken it head on, and taken the channeled message itself, purely, before anything else.

Quote:The overall progression of the sessions, speaking VERY broadly, is to progress from more interest in transient matters to less interest. What would be interesting would be a study guide or companion commentary that reversed this: instead of focusing on the transient matters first and getting less transient, focus on the non-transient matters first and bring in the transient "space opera" details as more fundamental matters are developed (if at all).

The problem here is that, in reformulating Ra's messages without many of the examples of the more fantastic details, there is significant opportunity for distortion, through personally filtering the material in precisely the way those of L/L did not, at least not consciously.

that would not be a wise course of action. what is space opera to one, may be something that would unlock something in another's subconscious, even without the person being aware of it.
I dunno, dude, you might wanna try going the other way. The world may be ready now for the first Space Opera! I'd buy a ticket.

I might suggest a Wagnerian approach.


Glad you're open to any response, by the way.
(01-21-2011, 01:51 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]this is a matter of spirit. you should have taken it head on, and taken the channeled message itself, purely, before anything else.

I'd appreciate it if you could expand on your reasoning here. It might help understand your perspective better. Your position here is just about as opposite to mine as I could imagine!

(01-21-2011, 01:51 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]that would not be a wise course of action. what is space opera to one, may be something that would unlock something in another's subconscious, even without the person being aware of it.

I couldn't agree more. Which is why this would not be a rewriting of the material itself; the original sessions would obviously be the important core material to investigate. Ideally I'm thinking of something to be to the sessions what the Talmud is to the Torah.

In any case, don't construe any of this to mean that I don't appreciate your perspective, Unity. I see where you're coming from and in many ways agree with what you're saying.
(01-21-2011, 01:56 PM)peregrine Wrote: [ -> ]I dunno, dude, you might wanna try going the other way. The world may be ready now for the first Space Opera! I'd buy a ticket.

I might suggest a Wagnerian approach.


Glad you're open to any response, by the way.

Absolutely! You might be right about it being the other way around - one could see a lot of David Wilcock's work as upping the ante on the exo-political aspect of all this.

I don't bring any of this up lightly; it's something I've thought about for a long, long time. If anything, my rereading of the material has made me less convinced of the thesis I'm arguing, not more. But I also recognize how deeply used to the attitude and concepts of the material I am, and that newbies don't have this.

What would really help me is your explanations for *why* you would not choose this path I've explained. The reason is that I've discussed this with myself a lot, but I haven't exposed this approach to much scrutiny from otherselves. It's sort of a final test of the idea to bring it up at all.
I got a 1:11 when considering your points of view, you guys should know. I'm increasingly of the opinion that the value of this would not outweigh the disservice it would do. Thanks for letting me test drive the idea with y'all!
(01-21-2011, 02:06 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]I'd appreciate it if you could expand on your reasoning here. It might help understand your perspective better. Your position here is just about as opposite to mine as I could imagine!

regardless of how us, and the logoi in this creation may attempt to make it more understandable and organized, it seems that the ways and means of spirit, the thing which everything is based on, seems mysterious indeed.

ra says it is there even at 1d, the entity becomes aware of it at end of 2d. it is very probable that it was there long before 1d, and it was there in the earlier octave, and it was there for each and every entity, even when the first thought was being conceptualized. the entire existence and manifestation seems to be the discovery and manifestation of it.

it cant be surpassed, it cant be tricked, it can only be delayed. it is the driving force behind everything, and it will go where it wants to go.

in that respect, it is much better to evaluate things from the perspective of spirit, before anything else. taking an information head on, and letting one's own spirit do whatever it wants to do with it, would be the better course of action.

because, it wont matter this or that way, if one's spirit doesnt want the information/encounter/whatever. doesnt matter how useful and enlightening the information is, doesnt matter how rare the encounter is. if it doesnt want it, it doesnt want it.

anything lacking the driving force of spirit behind it, will not even be half arsed.

Quote:I couldn't agree more. Which is why this would not be a rewriting of the material itself; the original sessions would obviously be the important core material to investigate. Ideally I'm thinking of something to be to the sessions what the Talmud is to the Torah.

why dont you just go ahead and provide your perspective and take on it, while stating it directly and clearly ? it is certain that there are people who would be seeing it through your perspective, and would make use of that perspective.

instead of trying to conform it to this, or that, why dont you let what you see flow freely ?
We inevitably face these questions when trying to present the material to others. Good topic.

Awakening tends to be a gradual process that builds upon other beliefs. When presented with the evidence of reincarnation, I accepted it. That led me to Buddhism, which opened me up to the idea of oneness. So the question becomes, is it possibly to offer this spiritual philosophy without the predication of other beliefs? I even know people who understand that they are the creator, but do not desire to pursue this material!

I think it would be interesting to distill the information. The seeker inevitably wants to know the how and why you came to these conclusions though. With Buddhism, I only incorporated certain aspects of it into my beliefs. Presenting the material in its context has its advantages, and without context, as you said can create distortion.

What makes this material unique and incomparable is its context though. There are plenty of paths out there exploring oneness. So the question becomes why remove what makes it unique?
my approach is, give whatever that is asked, however and in the size it is asked.

one should go with the flow.

exceptions are places in which people coalesce consciously, and willingly, to participate in exchange of advanced thoughts and information, like this one.
If you want to introduce someone to the concept of unity, it may be easiest to give them some of Rumi's poetry, or a good translation of the Tao Te Ching, as both come from an essential philosophy of oneness.

Both are extremely beautiful and poetic in their own right. The Tao Te Ching has the appeals of being extremely short (easily readable in under an hour), naturalistic, and philosophical, Rumi has the appeal of it's love-based and humanistic nature.

Neither requires the reader to accept the "space opera" of the Law of One, or even become a new ager, as Rumi and Lao Tzu are extremely old.

One can always another to the Ra Material -a far larger, more difficult, and controversial body of work - later.
Thanks for everybody reflecting back to me what I suspected from the get go. It has been useful to get this out of my system. I appreciate having a forum where I can float something like this and get high quality feedback. As I said before, my re-reading of the material is giving me a better appreciation for how the transient stuff fits in to this.

My path has been to be highly involved in political circles where there is a great deal of emphasis on reason, rationality, skepticism, etc. While not the only reason I contemplated such a distillation, I must admit that being able to talk about my values without having to use the word "Ra" would help me greatly. But it would also be unbalanced, I think. I am going through the lessons of honesty and openness by placing my cards on the table, so to speak, to let my words stand for themselves and allow myself to be discredited by those who won't accept my full self. So there's some falling away going on here that is tangled up in the thesis I'm sharing with you.

Unity100, you are penetrating to a real distortion with me, namely an intellectual appreciation for the material that may not be completely balanced with an emotional or spiritual appreciation. This is something that I am currently working on, but having explained your reasoning made me see your perspective and I wanted to confirm your insight. Smile
Jeremy, the language of the RA material is written in a manner which is highly rationalistic and precise.

This is both because Don, an engineer, was the questioner, and because I think Ra wrote it intentionally in such a manner because they felt that this type of language would be most appropriate for modern times.

There are a number of very beautiful parables used, but overall the material is largely left brained.

It it like a rock bringing a structure to my search, answering many basic questions and being a sort of guide by which one can judge other material.

There is certainly value in other approaches, though. I largely attribute the success of Christianity to the fact that it presents such a visceral, vivid, and emotional story with a central figure, Christ, that one can try to emulate.

I personally enjoy the emotion and humanism of Rumi, and find the simplicity and naturalism of Lao Tzu which is great for meditation.

Using other material is not being dishonest to yourself or copping out.

The Tao Te Ching says:

"Therefore, the Sage ...
induces the masses to return from where
they have overpassed.
He only helps all creatures to find their own nature,
But does not venture to lead them by the nose. "
(01-21-2011, 04:21 PM)jivatman Wrote: [ -> ]Using other material is not being dishonest to yourself or copping out.

No, but using other material requires me to read other material, which I haven't had much inclination to do since I found the Law of One. Maybe the challenge here is to focus less on the Law of One sessions as some sort of final word on these matters and focus more on really communicating concepts. One strategy for doing so is expanding the vocabulary and concept menu by becoming more well read in spiritual works.

Before I found the Law of One, I was into to A Course in Miracles, which I also found very philosophical and cerebral. So this is a pattern with me, and I have been advised in the past to seek "the expansion of the heart center and of the ability to freely tangent on concepts of love, to see love for so many others who cannot or will not see it for themselves."

And so the struggle continues as my appreciation for it grows little by little Smile
(01-21-2011, 03:41 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]Unity100, you are penetrating to a real distortion with me, namely an intellectual appreciation for the material that may not be completely balanced with an emotional or spiritual appreciation. This is something that I am currently working on, but having explained your reasoning made me see your perspective and I wanted to confirm your insight. Smile

there is no clear differentiation in between intellectual appreciation, or, emotional appreciation of anything, because, all of those are just projections of spirit.

mind, is a creation of spirit, and body, is a creation of mind.

all emotions, feelings, thoughts, are experienced in mind. (yes, emotions too, experienced in mind), as ra tells us.

that makes everything that is happening, projections and manifestations of the spirit.

so then there wouldnt be any differentiation in between mental or emotional appreciation or understanding of something, since, both are projections of spirit. both have weighting according to the individual spirit's preference.

but, then, if the entity is feeling that any of his/her approach is imbalanced deep inside, in spirit level, then it means that the entity is not happy with the current approach in spiritual level. hence, it should be changed.
(01-21-2011, 06:57 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]but, then, if the entity is feeling that any of his/her approach is imbalanced deep inside, in spirit level, then it means that the entity is not happy with the current approach in spiritual level. hence, it should be changed.

You have said it.
(01-21-2011, 05:54 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe the challenge here is to focus less on the Law of One sessions as some sort of final word on these matters and focus more on really communicating concepts.

I agree with you..it seems to be the most reasonable approach. I've seen other posts of yours on here, and you have a great understanding of the material. I think we sometimes get ahead of ourselves trying to teach everything at once. It's helpful to remember that as wanderers, we came here to help this planet into the density of love. It would seem that the lessons of love should ultimately be our main message. Compassion and service to others would be great areas to focus on in your political circles.
I don't think I can say much here besides the fact that I agree with the overall consensus of this thread: There's no way to judge what's appropriate for another entity to hear, you should share earnestly and honestly, and you can't know if you've preincarnationally planned for you to share.

And I can back that up with a personal story... I was able to share the Law of One with someone else for the first time last night. I worked together with this girl at a gas station for several months. Her and I are very compatible on most levels of mind, and I'm certain we have a lot past life history. Conversations with her have never dipped into the spiritual. But last night, we were texting, and ruthlessly flirting with eachother in good sport like we always do. Tongue I asked her if she had ever dreamed of having sex with me. (I'm going somewhere with this, I promise.) Of course she responded with the playful "Maaaayyybe..." I asked her if she specifically remembered a dream in which we had experienced a green ray sexual energy transfer. (but I phrased it in a way understandable to her: a higher conscious aspect of ourselves having cosmic sex in heaven!) She was surprised and kind of weirded out to remember this time/space meeting of ours!

So, I started to explain the mechanics of time/space and dreaming to her, and she asked me how I knew all of this. That obviously lead to me outlining the basics of the Ra material. (which, even when texted in the shortest manner possible, still consists of some 15-17 text messages!) After which, I told her that if she thought I was genuinely crazy, I would shut up, otherwise I would be happy to share more. Amazingly, she didn't think I was crazy and was very interested...

But then again, there was the predisposing personal experience of the 4th density sexual energy transfer, the conscious memory of which being brought into both of our waking lives as a preincarnationally planned opportunity for this sharing to take place.

So... take it as you go and share without reservation I say! Big Grin Better to share your view of life from the LOO perspective as often as is feasible and have half the people you know think of you as crazy, and the other half started off on their journey of self discovery than to leave it all in potentiation!
I have'nt read all of the posts but i did read most of the OP and i want to say something. Whenever you try to share your information with people about the Law of One, talk about the spirtual and philosophical aspects of it and leave aside the whole space opera aspect of it. As you said, it is hard for people to grasp the idea of a planetary confederation, etc. So always focus on the spirtual aspects. When a person asks for information and is ready for it, he will be able to "accept" the more "conspiracy" part of the knowledge.
It just occurred to me that maybe living the Law of One by example is a function of the open heart/green ray. Whereas speaking your truth of the Law of One is a function of the blue ray. So, the first you should always do (so difficult!!). The second, you should only do when appropriate. How do you know when it's appropriate? You'll feel it. Intellect (blue) informed by the heart (green). It's balancing love with wisdom. The more you can consciously live the LOO by example, the more opportunities you'll have to share it.
My intention with the Law of One wiki was basically the opposite approach. That is, from the core material itself, provide an opportunity for anyone to expand on certain terms and concepts.
I think Living the Law of One 101 is a decent summary of the core of the Law of One. My mom read it and really liked it and she has never read The Law of One. I LOVED it, but I already read The Law of One before. I`m really looking forward to 102 and 103.
Jeremy,

Your question essentially is: How can I reach people with this amazing information in a way which they can hear without getting tripped up on the inevitable stumbling blocks of the "space opera".

Though not precisely what you were aiming for, I feel it necessary and helpful to begin my response by pointing out that, if you desire to reach and affect others in the most pure and powerful way possible, radiance of being through silence is the most effective communicator/conveyor of the infinite eternal. True self-realization is necessarily communicated to those who, be they receptive to the promptings of spirit, can hear and can see and can feel.

Ramana Maharshi expresses it nicely:

Quote:"Silence is ever-speaking; it is a perennial flow of language; it is interrupted by speaking. These words obstruct that mute language. There is electricity flowing in a wire. With resistance to its passage, it glows as a lamp or revolves as a fan. In the wire, it remains as electric energy. Similarly also, silence is the eternal flow of language, obstructed by words.

What one fails to know by conversation extending to several years can be known in a moment in Silence."

Elsewhere Ramana describes how the enlightened perform the greatest service to the world through simple, effortless, present moment radiance of being.

Ra also puts outwardly communicated information into proper perspective here:

Quote:http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=17&ss=1#2
Ra: It is impossible to help another being directly. It is only possible to make catalyst available in whatever form, the most important being the radiation of realization of oneness with the Creator from the self, less important being information such as we share with you.

Which isn't to say that someone could not change the world for the better with a book or an outwardly communicate message, just that, comparatively speaking, it will have the lesser impact in contrast to the entity who has awakened and does naught but exist, their consciousness merged irrevocably forever in the All Self.

Now, onto what your actually seeking to discuss! ; )

Ra describes the core principles of the Law of One when they name the "fundamental teachings of all planes of existence" as unity, love, light, and joy. If you wanted a starting point, I couldn't think of better. http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=52&ss=1#11

I haven't given your question consideration before this moment, but upon initial consideration I would suggest two paths:

1) Don't use the Law of One cosmology. Use another system of thought altogether. These principles are eminently and effectively communicated in other teachings without the trappings of densities, UFOs, bigfoots, etc.

I am eternally grateful for the framework of thought that the Law of One has provided me - it helps me to situate the increasing complexity of contradiction and confusion so prevalent in our particular world, and make sense of the illusion - but it is not at all necessary for enlightenment. Entities have penetrated and dismantled the veil in this particular third-density experience prior to the advent of the Ra contact.

Furthermore, other systems of thought already posit multiple dimensions with various hierarchies of entities populating those dimensions.

(The purest among those sources of information suggesting the distracting nature of speculation and analysis of these other realms of existence. Because, as Ra says, the fundamental teachings of ALL planes of existence are unity, love, light, and joy, and because, as Ra says, this experience is holographic, the pure seeker intent on the deepest penetration need only to focus on those core principles which will be the same at any level.)

While i have not elsewhere encountered a cosmology quite like the Law of One in terms of octaves of existence, there is congruency enough in the simple fact of multiple dimensions that this point can be amply covered (if needed to be covered at all) in other teachings.

What truly makes the Law of One stand out as far as i'm aware is its presentation of polarity, particularly the viability of the service to self path, and the framing of polarity in terms of service (i.e., to others vs self) and energetics (i.e., radiation vs absorption).

While other systems of thought have aided the perceptive entity in penetrating to the heart of formless, boundless awareness, I think that perhaps their one major deficiency is a lack of true understanding regarding the nature of the shadow. So in whichever way one might attempt to communicate the fundamental principles, it might be helpful to incorporate polarity, though attempting to explain how the service-to-self path leads to further evolution would prove problematic on many levels.

2) Take the essence of the Law of One using its core principles and communicate them through other mediums. Parables. Plays. Films. Music. Poetry. Art. Essays.

These principles are infinite in supply and impossible it is to exhaust the creative means by which they can be communicated.

The Law of One, being one particular "slant" on that truth which is "ever and always the same", is an indivisible package which, I think, would be somewhat diminished if stripped of its outer characteristics. Though i'm sure Bigfoot could go without serious loss to the material. : )

Much love,
GLB
GLB, IMHO your posts have consistently been thought provoking, and to the point. I don't know how much thought you put into your posts, but the effort is not wasted.
(01-23-2011, 04:11 AM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]GLB, IMHO your posts have consistently been thought provoking, and to the point. I don't know how much thought you put into your posts, but the effort is not wasted.

Gracias, amigo. : )
So, I just wanted to follow up on this.

A few days ago I finished a full re-read of Books 1-4. This to me is the heart of the material; I'm reading Book 5 but it doesn't have the same gravity or cadence as the first four.

As I read through with fresh eyes, I see that these sessions were presented with as complete transparency as possible. This strikes me as much more important than a concentrated dose of Law of One philosophy. I appreciate not just the human narrative that the sessions make plain but also the adept's narrative; the uncertain but faith-filled manner in which Don tries to both explore and serve, sometimes with remarkable success, sometimes with as flat a failure as a "No." from Ra.

This isn't just a body of philosophical material, after all; it's an experience that happened to people. To focus only on the nuggets of insight is to have a more distorted view than is necessary. I see that now; thanks for everybody's patience with me.
I certainly agree with your conclusions, J., yet there does remain the problem of general inaccessibility, no? I gather that it's a very hard read for most people. I know several who just can't get past the fragmentary format.

I've never read the "Ra Material for Dummies"-type introductory material, myself, but if what you had in mind was something like that for a specific audience which has not been reached out to by existing articles, perhaps it still could be a project worthy of your consideration?
(02-03-2011, 12:25 PM)peregrine Wrote: [ -> ]I certainly agree with your conclusions, J., yet there does remain the problem of general inaccessibility, no?

Yes. Two things on this:
  1. The study guide is crucial. It ties together themes that are all spread out over the material. I appreciate that some see the guide as a distortion, but it can really help get a discrete understanding of the terms and themes so that, when you see them in reading the source material, you recognize them. The guy who wrote the guide was an ACIM student, so maybe the way he wrote it resonates with me more than with others because, like him, I find a very similar je ne sais quoi to the two bodies of work. But I'd at least recommend a new reader of the material persue the guide to see if there's any value there for them - while reading the source material, of course.
  2. I really do want to take notes on a future re-read and start assembling my own "journal" of sorts. The point is not to elucidate the Law of One, which is utterly simple. The point, instead, is to have an experience of the material that allows for a different kind of reflection than merely reading it. This would also allow one to be able to more easily find original insights using the material as a jumping-off point. After all, none of us uses this body of work without at least a bit of interpolation - the key is to be honest with yourself and otherselves, as I see it, about the pedigree of the insight.

I think probably my next read, along the lines you mention, is to fully examine A Wanderer's Handbook and Law of One 101. I want to see the tack Carla took and internalize it.

Finally, I think for me writing is a very grounding thing. Not just the conversations on this forum but when one takes a thesis or concept and composes something on it, like an essay or even a blog post. I'm pretty good at doing that on political matters; I'd like to rediscover that capacity in my spiritual life.

Thanks for your feedback.

P.S. This is off topic, but at some point, a new edition of the full material, unabridged and in hardback, would be really good. I've often thought of seeing if I could get one made by a friend who does bookbinding by hand.
Good points, Jeremy, and I encourage your work.

I concluded that the nature of the Material has things going for it. First, as said, they determined to publish the information completely, leaving out nothing (especially after putting out Book 5) and making no edit.

Second, it challenges the reader, politely leaving unsaid that only the qualified would consume all of the information. Not that the info is dangerous but, if it got trivialized, it would end up on the same heap as so many other attempts to reveal truth.

Over these decades, the Material found/is finding its important audience. I don't know that we are a critical mass, but probably.

The Law itself is utterly simple. The distortions and implications make up the bulk of the material, and that would go into your work.

Many of us have processed the data and arrived at some personally important conclusions. Most of them, I have no doubt, are valid. A few come out in this forum and get tuned by the B4th social complex.

If your ambition doesn't run out (as mine has more than once), I suggest that you proceed with care. Share the work in progress with a small number of trusted others and put questions here when you want to work out a sticky point. That's just a suggestion; my thinking is that if you widely publish the work in progress you could get an overload of feedback.

I know what you mean about writing. It organizes your thinking and reveals to you any hole or inconsistency. I started a novel that incorporates the Law and distortions, but got stuck years ago because of my pesky ADD.

If you finish what you start, J, it must mean that its time is come.

Lee
what about a rock opera minus the Law of One? lol i don't think anything can be far from the Law of One actually. since everything IS one in the first place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Utpd1FfDIEQ
(02-03-2011, 12:47 PM)jeremy6d Wrote: [ -> ]P.S. This is off topic, but at some point, a new edition of the full material, unabridged and in hardback, would be really good. I've often thought of seeing if I could get one made by a friend who does bookbinding by hand.

Jeremy, this is in the works. Hopefully by 2012 (the year, not to signify harvest), we will produce a single-volume scholar edition of the Law of One consisting of Tobey's re-listened version, Q&A numbers included, with additional bonus material to be announced.

GLB
(02-03-2011, 10:06 PM)Bring4th_GLB Wrote: [ -> ]Jeremy, this is in the works. Hopefully by 2012 (the year, not to signify harvest), we will produce a single-volume scholar edition of the Law of One consisting of Tobey's re-listened version, Q&A numbers included, with additional bonus material to be announced.

GLB

This sounds amazing Smile
I'm glad you came to some conclusions Jeremy. Don's ability to navigate his way through the information was nothing short of extraordinary. He truly was meant to be the questioner. The material becomes a journey as you discover more and more, going through the process that the three of them went through.
Pages: 1 2