[quote='Bring4th_GLB' pid='28771' dateline='1297132047']
[quote]By the end of the second cycle,
the Law of Responsibility had begun to be effectuated by the increasing ability of entities to grasp those lessons which there are to be learned in this density. Thus, entities had discovered many ways to indicate a bellicose nature, not only as tribes or what you call nations but in personal relationships, each with the other, the concept of barter having given way to the concept of money; also, the concept of ownership having won ascendancy over the concept of nonownership on an individual or group basis.
Each entity then was offered many more subtle ways of demonstrating either service toward others or service to self with the distortion of the manipulation of others. As each lesson was understood, those lessons of sharing, of giving, of receiving in free gratitude—each lesson could be rejected in practice.
Without demonstrating the fruits of such learn/teaching the life span became greatly reduced, for the ways of honor/duty were not being accepted.
http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...stion_id=5[/quote]
I don't quite understand the full implications of their statement (especially with regard to the non-demonstration of the fruits resulting in the reduction of the life span)...[/quote]
[quote='peregrine' pid='28781' dateline='1297148678']
This is how I would venture to interpret that. If a being flunks Grade 3 one time, he has a greater responsibility to get it right when he repeats it. If he flunks it twice, there's even more pressure on him to get it right and get with the program. If, however, his teachers try and try to work with him and he simply fails to make use of the teaching, he's liable to descend in a downward spiral such as his life might, indeed, be shortened as he fails in his honor/duty . He may well end up on the corner with no health insurance or in jail. Or maybe he'd get a real job and distract himself with compulsive consumerism?[/quote]
Though for some reason I still feel we're not quite hitting the nail on the head, your analogy is genius! A great interpretation, Peregrine. Your writing above is the closest I've come to making sense of that section.
Using the logic of your analogy, it is as if time or the upward spiraling light creates a kind of back pressure that moves the entity forward, necessitating growth, enlarged awareness of Self, and increased enjoyment of love/light.
As the river of time attempts to carry the entity forward, failure to live up to the responsibility and demonstrate the learning of its particular evolutionary nexus results in reduced opportunity.
I may be mistaken but doesn't Ra indicate something along the lines of "use it or lose it", meaning that when opportunities are not used, they become less?
[quote='Confused' pid='28791' dateline='1297165711']
Dear GLB, I came across a very interesting exchange in the LOO today, that at first sight seemed innocuous. But a more closer reading personally revealed, what I think to be an important insight. From the LOO -
[quote]
82.4 Questioner: I would like to consider the condition at a time or position just prior to the beginning of this octave of experience. I am assuming that, just prior to the beginning of this octave,
intelligent infinity had created and already experienced one or more previous octaves. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. You assume correctly. However, the phrase would more informatively read,
infinite intelligence had experienced previous octaves.[/quote]
Gary, please notice the very subtle semantic difference, but one that contains a grand truth if taken literally. Don says 'created and experienced', but Ra avoids 'created' and stresses on only experienced. Does that not tell us something about the 'law of responsibility'?
If the ONE is only the experiencer, then who is the creator? Let us ponder on that a bit
[/quote]
Damn good point, Confused. I had before considered a similar statement from Ra that speaks directly to what you are (I believe) correctly inferring:
[quote]82.10 Questioner: Why does this partaking in the original thought have a gradient radially outward? That’s the way I understand your statement.
Ra: I am Ra. This is the plan of the One Infinite Creator. The One Original Thought is the harvest of all previous, if you would use this term, experience of the Creator by the Creator. As It decides to know Itself It generates Itself, into that plenum full of the glory and the power of the One Infinite Creator which is manifested to your perceptions as space or outer space. Each generation of this knowing begets a knowing which has the capacity, through free will, to choose methods of knowing Itself. Therefore, gradually, step by step, the Creator becomes that which may know Itself, and the portions of the Creator partake less purely in the power of the original word or thought.
The Creator does not properly create as much as It experiences Itself.
http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...tion_id=10[/quote]
It seems that the UNmanifest Creator (us, really) distorts itself, creating the illusion of manyness, bestowing the distortions with the capacity, the ability, and the desire to create as those distortions see fit - all in order to generate knowing of Self.
Meanwhile the UNmanifest, pure, timeless, spaceless, undistorted Creator (us) experiences that which its seeming parts
create.
Those many "parts" being none other than the infinite one, as there are not two but one only.
[quote='Confused' pid='28791' dateline='1297165711']
Does not then Ra's repeated reference to the semantic complex- 'One Infinite Creator'- take on a more significant meaning? We will consider one more verse -
[quote]
13.5 Questioner: Thank you. Can you tell me of the first known thing in the creation?
Ra: I am Ra. The first known thing in the creation is infinity. The infinity is creation.[/quote]
Confused, unfortunately i cannot smoke the green stuff or otherwise I might be able to contemplate this sizeable mystery. : )
You seem to imply that there is yet something more than, or behind, the "One Infinite Creator", that even the One Infinite Creator is a creative principle that manifests from
something else.
I'm not sure what to think of that, but I trust that reality is non-dual. So whatever it is we are attempting to conceive, it is looking through our eyes right now, and is our eyes, and is what we are looking at right now, and is more intimate and direct than even the highest knowledge, and within it there is no subject and object, no "in here" and "out there", but unbroken unity.
(This is *not* to negate, undermine, and minimize your musing. This is just me placing that thinking on the conveyor belt of my own mind which tends to push data down a trajectory that looks much like what I described above. Always attempting to see, to know the real.)
With humble love and gratitude to fellow co-thinkers,
GLB