Bring4th

These 2 terms are widely used in new age communities and even conspiracy and some occult circles. Where do these terms come from? We're they used prior to contact with Confederation? Without context of the Ra material these terms can be misunderstood. Just wondering if there were other sources that explained these terms. Thanks!

Austin found the possible earliest use of term http://www.llresearch.org/transcripts/is..._0519.aspx

Didn't it say right in the material that it came from Oahspe?

---

32/6.1. Whether on earth or in heaven, the same rules apply to both:

32/6.2. He who serves himself one-half, and serves others one-half, shall stand grade fifty.

32/6.3. He who serves himself three-quarters, and others one-quarter, shall stand grade twenty-five.

32/6.4. He who serves himself one-quarter, and others three-quarters, shall stand grade seventy-five.

32/6.5. He who serves himself only, shall stand grade one.

32/6.6. He who serves others wholly, shall stand grade ninety-nine.

32/6.7. And whoever serves accordingly, himself or others, shall stand in grade even as his works manifest.

32/6.8. To serve one's self is to work for one's self; to strive for one's self, to think of one's own self, as to what will benefit one's own self only.

32/6.9. To serve others, is to do good to others; to help them; to teach them; to give them joy and comfort. This is the service of Jehovih.

32/6.10. But there are some who are below the grades; who seek to do evil; who seek to make others unhappy; who delight in crime and pollution. These, if mortal, shall be called druks; and if spirits, shall be called drujas [druj, singular --Ed.].

32/6.11. The grades of my heavens of the earth, being atmospherea, in general follow this manner:

32/6.12. Grade one is on the earth; grade fifty, midway between the earth and the emancipated heavens, etherea.

32/6.13. Grade twenty-five is one-quarter of the way up from the earth, toward etherea; but grade seventy-five is three-quarters of the way up, toward etherea. And so on, intermediate grades and places of ascent corresponding in like manner.

32/6.14. But grade ninety-nine is the highest atmospherean grade, preparatory to entrance into the company of the all pure in spirit.

32/6.15. But good works alone are not sufficient to attain the highest grades, for they require knowledge and capacity to unfold others.

32/6.16. To accomplish which, those of the higher grades shall often return to the lower, and learn to lift them up. For this is what calls the ethereans in the times of resurrections.

32/6.17. Accordingly the righteous, who are yet mortal, begin at once lifting up their fellows.

32/6.18. Which labor is to the spirit as exercise is to the mortal body, that which gives strength.

32/6.19. Judge, then, yourself, O man of the earth, as to the place your spirit will rise in the time of your death.

Thank you did not see the reference, no. Only the percentage thing.

Above excerpted from: http://oahspestandardedition.com/OSE_32.html

Oahspe concepts were around at least since 1882, so therefore contemporary with the Theosophical society.

Quote:17.31 Questioner: Thank you very much. I don’t wish to take up extra time by asking questions over again. Some are so important I try to ask some similar questions in different ways to expand on the answer. Seems to be [inaudible] what we’re getting at, maybe not.

In the book Oahspe it states that if an individual is more than fifty percent for others— that is, goes over the 50% service to others, and is less than fifty percent for service to self, then he is harvestable. Is this a correct statement?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct if the harvesting is to be for the positive fourth dimensional level.

Do you know any other sources apart from the Ra material andOahspe that explains these concepts in detail?

(12-30-2013, 11:04 PM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]Do you know any other sources apart from the Ra material andOahspe that explains these concepts in detail?

Possibly something by George Hunt Williamson, such as "The Saucer Speaks". Will check.

28/28.10. There are two modes of discussion before all men: One is to impart light, and the other is to abuse the opponent. The first is Jehovih‘s, the second is satan‘s method. In the family discussion, the latter method shall not be tolerated by the father [rab‘bah –Ed.].

oahspe

[/align]

(12-30-2013, 09:56 PM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]These 2 terms are widely used in new age communities and even conspiracy and some occult circles. Where do these terms come from? We're they used prior to contact with Confederation? Without context of the Ra material these terms can be misunderstood. Just wondering if there were other sources that explained these terms. Thanks!

Austin found the possible earliest use of term http://www.llresearch.org/transcripts/is..._0519.aspx

I think the terms themselves as names for the positive and negative paths may have been introduced in the Ra material, specifically this quote: "The Law of One blinks neither at the light or the darkness, but is available for service to others and service to self." (And the rest of that answer.)

The channeling Austin found mentions "attempts which each of you makes to give service to others" which isn't quite as pithy, and it doesn't mention the service to self path at all.

Thank you all for help in understanding this!

Yeah Austin helped to find earliest mention of service. I guess it was Hatton speaking so they wanted to highlight service to others lol.

Those terms do seem more helpful than saying lightness and darkness. I am seeing it used to describe objects as STS or STO such as money is STS or company is STS, this is action is STO. Kind of saying good and evil or good and bad. Devoid of the whole part about making a conscious intent/choice to follow a path.

If people were to learn one core thing about these terms would you think it's the part about the choice to polarize?

(01-01-2014, 03:37 PM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]If people were to learn one core thing about these terms would you think it's the part about the choice to polarize?

Yes, I think so.

The Choice is what's most important regarding this entire cycle of incarnations. Once one makes it, one may falter a bit while still attempting to fully polarize in ether direction. But once the choice has been made and with pure intentions, ones path deliniates or rather proceeds upon it's intended path.

After The Choice, contemplation upon what would be considered a service to others decision in a conscious matter becomes a bit disengenuous therefore losing whatever polarity might have been gained. Whereas a service to self path would integrate a purposeful use of its polarity to consciously manipulate and control circumstance to benefit itself. It shall also consciously reject all societal norms internally but externally project either an active or passive aggressive tactic for self advancement which it will then full integrate into a society that based upon such materialistic and superficial ideals perfectly suited for such an entity. Thus having the prototypical alpha male/female mentality would be most appropriate in this endeavor.

On the contrary in terms of service to others, one cannot go out and seek out service as I'm are you're aware of. It should be an instantaneous reaction of wanting to help without wavering. It's that unwavering need to do what one feels as right or what one would hope another self would do for them. To be within the moment where an other self asks for service of any kind, to simply respond to this call without having to consciously decide if it's indeed a service is where true polarity resides.

Jeremy, I believe you offer much generalization and a lack of nuance. The choice of polarity has its differences between the paths of humility and will.

I offer one example: Look to the differences in service between the entities of Latwii and Ra.

Comparing the service that entities of higher densities partake in is inconsequential and immaterial in terms of service of incarnates upon this density. They have specific requirements of lessons involving the parameters of love, compassion, and/or wisdom. Therefore comparing our service to others through which we center upon the yellow ray are like apples and oranges to the green through violet rays that which they are operating upon.

Of course we can center upon the green ray to show us the love that we posess for all other selves, it's not our intention within this density. Accessing higher centers is reserved for adepts which as they have stated time and time again is reserved for a select few. My answer was directed towards the majority of seekers and wanderers who wish to polarized within the confines of this illusion without the need of attainment of the higher penetration of energy centers as the adept does.

Adonai: What is humility, as you use it here. This word usually comes with much culturally laden meaning.

While we're on the topic of origins and Oahspe, I'm pretty sure that's where "density" is first used in the sense it is presented in the Ra Material. Don studied Oahspe pretty extensively, had an impact. I'm seeing "density" around a lot on the web recently, it's a term in spiritual context that's definitely gaining momentum, for better or worse.

The new-age meme is fairly incestuous with its notions and buzzwords. Intuitives, grasping to express what their unconscious is suggesting, will readily adopt any terminology which resonates - via free association, sort of underscoring the degree of unconscious participation involved. The problem is that what something may evoke in awareness and what may actually inform awareness are often quite different due to lack of seated experience. Intuitional apprehension always precedes the comprehension and understanding which form authentic experience. Yet soley due to lack of honesty, the mere apprehension is often overextended, offering the informative equivalent of feckless fingerpointing which feeds back into the vague-notion resource of the meme.

I remember Ra saying that before the idea of manyness had been thought of there was only service to self, however once the creator created the concept of manyness the possibility of service to others was brought forth.

(01-05-2014, 02:38 PM)Bat Wrote: [ -> ]I remember Ra saying that before the idea of manyness had been thought of there was only service to self, however once the creator created the concept of manyness the possibility of service to others was brought forth.

Where did you read that?

(01-02-2014, 12:32 AM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]Adonai: What is humility, as you use it here. This word usually comes with much culturally laden meaning.

Respect for how things are and not affecting them out of personal desire for service.

I vaguely remember hearing Carla and/or Don using the word density years before they got the Ra contact. I also remember that I didn't know what it meant but chose not to ask because I didn't want to show my ignorance, first, and secondly they used it so seldom that I figured I didn't need to know it and could deduce it by continuing to pay attention. I probably guessed, by context, that it was us earth humans and not the folks that flew the UFOs.

They would "quote" the Oahspe (paraphrase more like) on a rare occasion, and Don showed me the book when I asked about it. It was huge and not easy to read, so I didn't even attempt to study it, but Don obviously had put in the time. The pages had a top half and bottom half that he explained related to each other even as you would read one or the other for page after page, and not both at the same time. Not me, anyway.

Thanks for sharing your experience Kycahi, it's always interesting to hear people's encounters with Don and co.

Yeah Oahspe is an anthology, a huge collection of "books" (by the same "author") I believe around 997 pages all together, all in Ol' english with sprinklings of scientific terms (the contrast is quite humorous at times) it's a testament to Don's effort that he was willing to study it in the depth he did

Edit: My signature is from the book of Sue chapter 3 verse 2 in Oahspe

(01-05-2014, 06:03 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-05-2014, 02:38 PM)Bat Wrote: [ -> ]I remember Ra saying that before the idea of manyness had been thought of there was only service to self, however once the creator created the concept of manyness the possibility of service to others was brought forth.

Where did you read that?

i really want to kno the answer to this.

I think maybe he got it backwards.

Quote:77.19 Questioner: Do the Logoi that choose this type of evolution choose both the service-to-self and the service-to-others path for different Logoi, or do they choose just one of the paths?

Ra: I am Ra. Those, what you would call, early Logoi which chose lack-of-free-will foundations, to all extents with no exceptions, founded Logoi of the service-to-others path. The, shall we say, saga of polarity, its consequences and limits, were unimagined until experienced.

(01-07-2014, 02:33 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: [ -> ]I think maybe he got it backwards.

Yes, I remembered Ra saying that we started as all STO and, at some point somebody latched onto STS. The Higher Ones, to use a term I just thought of, must have decided to let it go and see what might result, and concluded that it was a messy 3D but one with accelerated Harvest from it. Gee thanks.

---

(01-06-2014, 11:02 PM)Fang Wrote: [ -> ]My signature is from the book of Sue chapter 3 verse 2 in Oahspe

That signature ("I created man at zero, but for him to add unto himself forever"), has a hint of the odd style of Oahspe yet also shows how much information can be in a single short sentence for one who is ready to get it.

I think that channeled material has quirky language to screen out the unready.