Let's assume you believe Ra is an actual entity and that the channelers didn't define the whole material, which they didn't. I mean, how many times would they tell themselves they are incorrect, heh?
Anyways, Ra is too humble for his own good. They live up to their title "a humble messenger."
In a lot of the passages, the channelers will make a guess as to the archetype or some other understanding and it will have varying degrees of inaccuracy. Ra will be nice about it and tell them what is right about the guess, even if it is the tiniest truth. In these cases, do not take the entire query as to be a correct understanding. Make sure you are differing between points made by the actual entity and biases being accommodated by the entity.
If this is not done, then you are going to have a bad time with some portions of the material.
Now if you believe Ra is a complete fiction and what the channelers say goes, then have at it. I wish you luck with that.
Just be wary of the interpretations of the material and what the actual material says. This is how most great works end up being completely neutered: Somebody takes authority over the meaning of the work.
"Somebody takes authority over the meaning of the work. "
Oh, tell me about it *winks*
Jokes aside, Adonai One, Ra himself has stated multiple times that the Arhetypes -and the whole material as well- is not meant to be for using it without any self-reflection and meditation on the very matter. That alone should be able to give everyone a subjective, and digestable variation on the ever-changing concepts described in the Law of One.
I shall refrain from declaring that there is a right and wrong interpretation of this, however.
You can only add so much interpretation to a tangible and wholly-united universe.
Deception, illusion and delusion exists especially in regards to the archetypes. There are wrong ways to interpret things. Of course, if you view a life of delusion as virtuous, then so
be it.
How one views art is subjective, for instance. However when it comes to denying the canvas, its very materials and structure -- that's when subjectivity ends.
(08-10-2013, 03:11 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]You can only add so much interpretation to a tangible and wholly-united universe.
Deception, illusion and delusion exists especially in regards to the archetypes. There are wrong ways to interpret things. Of course, if you view a life of delusion as virtuous, then so
be it.
How one views art is subjective, for instance. However when it comes to denying the canvas, its very materials and structure -- that's when subjectivity ends.
Please.
You, your posts, they are MADE from the very same canvas that you talk about. The person who, according to you, misinterprets the archetypes, not understanding the "True" meaning of them goes through a journey. You yourself do the same. You believe now that you posess a knowledge that is absolutely set in stone and cannot be taken from you, but here comes the kicker: the moment you say I AM, the moment you open the red chakra, the first stepping stone for existence to come to fruition, you are walking on tangible, subjective paper.
Therefore, the true meaning of an archetype is an empty statement. There is but one heavy charge associated with such statements: your (and anyone else's, including me when I type this post) intent to radiate something to the other-selves, hoping that they absorb it for their "own good". However, that can be a futile endeavor more often than not: simply because you cannot know that you are indeed right and they are wrong, you cant know what their own path entails, what current understanding or belief they posess regarding them, and also you cant know what comes out of such understanding.
What seems to be a mistake from an outsider point of view can be the greatest achievement in one's life. The greatest luck, the greatest experience, or the greatest source of depression and misery that pushes someone into finally sheding all that, and use self-reflection more often.
You say: "Here, this is how you climb this ladder if you want to get to the Top, to the Source".
The person, made out of archetypes, living archetype-based stories, having an archetype-based life in this archetype-based 3rd density realm, can say "huh? No, I am going from bump to bump, USING this ladder. This is my story".
"But you are wrong".
"Am I?"
But the path is neither a ladder nor a pathway, neither the journey nor the destination. It is all at the same time! Or, to be more precise, such is my understanding of the matter - which, is not to be taken seriously, after all: otherwise I would argue against myself, clearly.
Haha, I certainly hope I have not said that nor implied that.
I only have one message: These archetypes have an understandable structure that can be universally agreed upon. The individual archetypes can be subjectively understood but their purpose, their application is correlated directly to the core phenomenons of this reality and the so-called "climbing of the ladder" which is ironically one subjective veil out of many.
(08-10-2013, 03:43 PM)michael430 Wrote: [ -> ]Just hypothetically....if Ra was channeled again by another group and had lots to say and this time said the Tarot no longer matters just like they say it's too late for the pyramids.....Would you then be open to the possibility that they may mean more/different things than you currently believe?
I have direct contact with Ra and they have taught the archetypes to me directly. That's all I will say because I've already been chastised for attempting to channel Confederation entities. Ironically, the very Confederation I am a member of.
This is the 3rd thread made on the same subject. Are we looping here?
(08-10-2013, 03:56 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]I have direct contact with Ra and they have taught the archetypes to me directly. That's all I will say because I've already been chastised for attempting to channel Confederation entities. Ironically, the very Confederation I am a member of.
I have a question to Ra. I have met them - communicated with them - exactly once, through a dream. Interestingly enough, the message they gave me was very relevant to this thread. Is it still something I should pursue?
Quote:Somebody takes authority over the meaning of the work.
Quote:These archetypes have an understandable structure that can be universally agreed upon. The individual archetypes can be subjectively understood but their purpose, their application is correlated directly to the core phenomenons of this reality and the so-called "climbing of the ladder" which is ironically one subjective veil out of many.
Quote:I have direct contact with Ra and they have taught the archetypes to me directly.
Hmm, ironic...
(08-10-2013, 04:02 PM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]This is the 3rd thread made on the same subject. Are we looping here?
Blue and indigo drowning out the orange and green.
Blue just absolutely needs to communicate, but in this state cannot translate.
Uh oh, someone played the Hitler card.
The danger of specializing in an area is that you can lack clarity/ability in other areas of potential, this is something I learned after pursuing the path of the adept.
Look, i'm really drunk so this may not make sense but:
Most entities attempting to channel Ra after becoming acquainted with the Ra material are watering the seeds of self deception. There is such potential for personal thought projection that people should be much more wary than it seems they are being.
I'm not gonna quote it officially because of said drunkness but there is a part in the LOO that says "no two entities will have the same interpretation of the archetypes". Forcing people to accept an/your 'objective' model of this twenty-two stage function isn't going to work whether your right or wrong, given people's alignment to this material because of strong resonance to their innermost core.
Look, if your going to make the claim that is sufficient potential of distortion due to the channeler(s) you must accept that you are no exception, this is more important than anything I have to say. Pure truth is out of our reach for now brother, by accepting that we can move closer to potentially understanding the whole thing but you, you, an intricate piece of infinity, can not, for now.
I have walked the dark path, I have done what you are attempting (though you are not necessarily STS), I understand, what everyone here says is out of love believe it or not.
One thing I've learned in this life is that the greatest teachers are not teachers, but teacher/learners. That is to say those that learn, no one could teach more about trees than one who is/has been a tree, if you wish to teach you must accept that you have much to learn.
You remind me of someone long lost to me, I don't wish to discourage you but do you notice that you are often met with disagreement?
It's for a reason, It's not that you are a righteous rebel fighting against the rigid moral/conservative structure but that people that legitimately care about you want to see you happy, and are trying to guide you on a path which they see may be more beneficial for you. Now my internets about to run out so I may not be able to talk for a few days but remember everything is a value/ratio of distortion, it's not that something is wrong/right it's more so that is more wrong/right than an alternative, you will find that everything is only separated by degrees of differentiation, truth is no exception, I mean it. With Love.
Adonai One, you have been given much feedback to process here from the other forum members, that much is clear to me.
I'd simply like to suggest that you chew slowly, and give your palate a chance to really pick apart the flavors...
(08-10-2013, 03:11 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]You can only add so much interpretation to a tangible and wholly-united universe.
Deception, illusion and delusion exists especially in regards to the archetypes. There are wrong ways to interpret things. Of course, if you view a life of delusion as virtuous, then so
be it.
How one views art is subjective, for instance. However when it comes to denying the canvas, its very materials and structure -- that's when subjectivity ends.
Actually you could add an infinite amount of interpretation to a wholly united universe, as you can only treat infinity as one.
Your point about subjectivity though, i have some stuff to say about that. If I examined a canvas I could tell you it's 'smooth' or whatever, now while words have somewhat institutionalized meanings in the end the interpretation is entirely subjective. By applying your personal definition of 'smooth' to the perceived properties of the canvas you would arrive at an idea that is yours, not a separate/objective 'truth'. There's only degrees of difference of subjectivity, objective views are still the persons idea of what objectivity should be, and then processing a view through that altered/fragmented perception, that's still a subjective view haha.
Subjectivity never ends in a self aware universe.
Edited for atrocious spelling