Bring4th

The foundation of a forum is discussion. Discussions can be opening and enlarging to all in involved (accepting the validity of another's opinion and exploring it without judgement), or they can be reductionist and restricting (tearing it apart).

Let us remember that we are united in the belief in an alien from the future that spoke though a channel to give the people of the human race information on how to enlighten themselves, beamed telepathic information to those wishing to either serve the self or others, and walked around the planet (with no legs manifest) while building the great pyramids by thought alone.

And yet, on this very forum, other concepts are argued against due to a lack of scientific evidence or simply because it seems far fetched. The irony of both is quite mind boggling considering our united belief.

We take the Ra Material - external information with which we can only give our trust and faith in - and then apply said information to either promote, or not, one's own belief system as truth. The Ra Material would be labelled ridiculous by many. Millions upon millions in fact. But, it resonates with us here, and we accept it as truth. It's a personal truth, and nothing else, because none of us have met Ra in person, been whisked through time/space and experienced all that has been told. Nor has it been scientifically validated.

Experience is subjective and some people have had experiences vastly different to our own. To claim that they are not truth, while basing ones own truth on something they cannot prove, is defined by the term ignorance, as it professes to have knowledge in an area that one may not actually have.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ignorance

I don't mention that in a judgemental manner, it's simply the relevant defining word.

I am ignorant, we are all ignorant. It's the nature of the veil.

Quote:Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.

When we try and fit other people's experiences within our own (distorted) personal truths, with no scope for enlarging our own understanding and only to de-validate another, it's highly polarising. Probably not in the way one intends it to be.

Ignorance can only be quelled by experience - wisdom. Without it, we simply regurgitate and project notions.

The point of this post; let's all (and I'm wholly including myself in this statement) remember that we share a common belief. That belief is absurd to others, yet resonates as truth to us. If something here doesn't resonate, rather than collapse it into one's own belief system, appreciate it as it is, explore it through contemplation and be humble in the fact that experience is infinite and unlimited. We do not know it all, we're not meant to know it all (see the above Ra quote).

Doing so with individuals and groups balances the orange and yellow rays, allowing the green ray to flourish.

In Ra's own words, this is not the density of understanding. It is the density of choice. There is only one choice that leads to 4D+.

Peace :¬)

To say "everything is subjective" is to cop out with extreme relativism. If you want to say that we are only dealing with personal truths than what would the point of discussion be?
Yeah, we all are ignorant, to a degree, and the degree differs according to the individual's interpretation of what they experience. Honest debate will get us past a lot of these issues in discussion because it will just get rid of all those personal problems clouding what you convey.

Also, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that the same scrutiny is not applied to science or other belief structures than what posters here display by those you seem to be referring to. Sometimes I've been harsh on people here, but it's only because I have experienced the same thing and learned the falsity of the perception the hard way and would rather give others an opportunity to learn without pain, but of course people can always assume that I'm just being a jackass. Take your divine choice lol

Putting one's faith in the Ra Material, the cornerstone of this forum, is subjective:

Quote:Subjective: based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions

That core and foundational belief then influences the entire being and hence thought, word and deed.

This is what I mean by subjective.

The point of the discussion would be to learn more about experience - the Creator and it's many expressions - listen to other peoples experiences and use them for further contemplation, and not an opportunity to simply promote one's own answers. The infinite nature of Creation, third density especially - is to explore *all* possibilities. That encompasses opinions, beliefs and actions.

Quote:Also, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that the same scrutiny is not applied to science or other belief structures than what posters here display by those you seem to be referring to. Sometimes I've been harsh on people here, but it's only because I have experienced the same thing and learned the falsity of the perception the hard way and would rather give others an opportunity to learn without pain, but of course people can always assume that I'm just being a jackass.

That's assuming that your path is the correct and only path. There are many themes that people incarnate to explore, we cannot posit to understand them purely from our own viewpoint. Each is on their own journey. There is also a fine line when proffering one's truth without being asked; bordering between who it actually serves better. There was a fantastic discussion regarding that on this forum a couple of years ago, I'll see if I can find it.

This is the basis of teach/learn. It's a not a single way street, it's two way.

(02-07-2014, 07:41 AM)Fang Wrote: [ -> ]Take your divine choice lol

You are a divine jackass. The divinity of your jackassery knows no limits. Now give me a hug, ya jackass.

Quote:Understanding is not of this density.

I don't understand... but on a serious note this is a point I try reiterate to people.

I do think that sometimes when a users feels strongly about something they will state there beliefs as fact. Which often rubs people up the wrong way. I also think that when reading words from a name and a display picture we lose so much of the personality from which the words have come from. It's the old adage 'lost in translation', but I feel it to be inherently true.

I try to always speak from experience or offer a different perception on a situation for one to consider.

They are the same/different.

(02-07-2014, 07:09 AM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]We take the Ra Material - external information with which we can only give our trust and faith in - and then apply said information to either promote, or not, one's own belief system as truth. The Ra Material would be labelled ridiculous by many. Millions upon millions in fact. But, it resonates with us here, and we accept it as truth. It's a personal truth, and nothing else, because none of us have met Ra in person, been whisked through time/space and experienced all that has been told. Nor has it been scientifically validated.

Experience is subjective and some people have had experiences vastly different to our own. To claim that they are not truth, while basing ones own truth on something they cannot prove, is defined by the term ignorance, as it professes to have knowledge in an area that one may not actually have..

In my opinion, this is likely a personal truth. I am here because I experienced these things before reading the material, and because the scientific study I have been questing on does validate everything I've read. As far as I'm concerned everything lines up so far, but that didn't/did come for free. :p I thought 'my' experiences were real/illusion, but maybe they are illusion/real..

(02-07-2014, 07:09 AM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]We do not know it all, we're not meant to now it all (see the above Ra quote).

not meant to now it all?

Oh the irony of this OP

(02-07-2014, 11:22 AM)primordial abyss Wrote: [ -> ]In my opinion, this is likely a personal truth. I am here because I experienced these things before reading the material, and because the scientific study I have been questing on does validate everything I've read. As far as I'm concerned everything lines up so far, but that didn't/did come for free. :p I thought 'my' experiences were real/illusion, but maybe they are illusion/real..

Indeed, anything I proffer here is distorted in my own understanding and is not intended to generalise each seeker's path. I too have spent much time seeking truth behind the words of Ra, more so for my own validation of it than anything, while recently, as said in another thread, action has taken precedent.

While I believe that the Ra Material is genuine, and the most valuable resource on the planet, I can't prove it. Nor do I need to, as it's my own truth that manifests the appropriate catalyst in which for me to learn from.

(02-07-2014, 11:30 AM)truesimultaneity Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2014, 07:09 AM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]We do not know it all, we're not meant to now it all (see the above Ra quote).

not meant to now it all?

Whoops

(02-07-2014, 11:53 AM)rie Wrote: [ -> ]Oh the irony of this OP

I expected this reply, and both understand and agree with it, hence I included/referenced myself (very clearly) in the OP more than once. We're all here to learn, I have my own distortions to iron out like everyone else :¬)

One personal note concerning the topic of acceptance and the interaction of people on a forum:

I've had trouble accepting how people interact on forums. Not this forum so much as other, more traditional internet forums. It took some time and some sinking in for me to realize that's its acceptable regardless of how people interact on a forum.

I've noticed that when I had an expectation that any given forum must become more balanced in its interaction, is when I thrust my personal distortions of lacking acceptance and when I become frustrated.

I can hope for and open a door for what I would consider more balanced forum interaction, but in the end I'm totally ok with the present and I accept the present. Everything on all internet forums is completely, without a doubt, acceptable, warts (imagined or real), and all. Trolls, flaming, hating, judging, it's all good. In the end, there are parts of me that resonate maybe .01% with that, right? And I accept that. It no longer evokes the strong emotional reaction it did (for most part). I had to dig deep into why people interacting in these ways upset me so much, and I realized it was a lack of acceptance of other's distortions, and an expectation that they balance themselves, especially once it was pointed out to them. This was a beautiful lesson for me because it was also my internal reality - I would get frustrated at myself when I wouldn't properly and quickly learn the balanced lesson for a given self-personal catalyst. It was almost like not accepting myself, and others, for their lack of progress in processing distortion, especially the more seemingly 'hurtful' distortions.

These days, I don't view things through that lense, and these days are definitely f'ing awesome. But it's not because I told myself to just accept it over and over again. I dug deep and I found ways to understand why it's hard to get the right balance immediately; I found ways to understand why someone would be hateful or spiteful; I found ways to understand why one would want to remain sleeping or why one would want to ignore conscious evolution of their beliefs. We were all there once, and in a certain sense, a part of us is always there. In short, it's all good man.

If you are super-bored just search the dominions 4 desura forum for elitesix and you will see the fireworks lol .

yes the inter/intra-subjectivity

Personal catalyst.That's part of this forum, too. If we were accepting of all ideas, not engaging in discernment (aka judgement), and we were not to have discussions (even heated ones), then this forum would be very stale learning environment. This forum is for everything, for everyone, to share with each other. We just need to respect the guidelines.

Re: subjectivity
So what happened to inter-subjectivity?

Rie, please restate your query.
Also, which archetype does your avatar represent? That is name and number.. I am synchronizing information..

rie - Indeed, everything is catalyst. A discussion board based upon acceptance is just as useful as one full of judgement.

Judging from what has actually been accepted even more so.

(02-07-2014, 01:41 PM)primordial abyss Wrote: [ -> ]Rie, please restate your query.

You've been reading too much Ra lol.

This thread is pretty much self explanatory and self evidential by the very posts made in response. I think something we have to come to terms with in this life is that agreement/disagreement is the engine of communication. There are those who will disagree, those who will agree, and those who just don't care. In every single person you ever meet, you will probably find some disagreement, just as you can probably find some agreement.

Most of the disagreement on this forum is well-intentioned, usually in an attempt to aid others in working through or not having to go through the same hardships. In many, if not all cases, this is taken from the basis of the experience of the individual and whatever conclusions they came to throughout their experiences and struggles, and most of all, the wisdom gained from working through those struggles.

I have seen much on this forum in terms of communication whereby the intention is for people to avoid some kind of delusion (usually seen to have been experienced by the self and thus claimed to be known as a delusion), to not over-identify (usually because personality is seen as imbalanced if grandiose), to avoid being mislead by any source (usually related to polarity or safety), from being "too intuitive" or "too mental" (usually coming from a basis of consideration of methods of truth gaining, or assessment of experience), etc, etc.

In short, anyone with a semblence of compassion will do what they can to help others to avoid the pitfalls they perceived themselves to have experienced.

I certainly believe in an objective existence, but I have not yet found a single form of validation for it that is not based entirely on the perception of the individual. In science they often use instruments to ascertain a reading that is as mechanical or reproducable as possible, yet somehow I have rarely met anyone who seems to acknowledge that the reading, construction and deductions made from the inferrence of such instruments all comes purely through human perception. The instruments do not make hypotheses and assumptions based on those hypotheses, it is humans that create all of the information which can apparent be assumed by such experiences and then organize them according to a heirarchy of description.

Labeling, categorization and word description dilute every objective consideration. Let us take a black hole for example. What if I gave it a different name, such as a unity point? (Just as an example) What if I then went through every book ever and changed where it says black hole to unity point? From then on, we would look at the object (which according to Descarte is actually a purely mental construct, preferring to call external things exactly that "things", whereas an object is an object of the mind, an encapsulation of the experience of a thing) from the standpoint and description of being a unity point, all the while referring to the exact same thing and object we were when we called it a black hole.

Do you think people would take the same connotations and inferrence from the description of a unity point rather than as a black hole? Where does objectivity start and subjectivity end, exactly? If we are part of objectivity with our subjectivity, then is not subjectivity actually part of objectivity and to work in purely subjective or purely objective terms it will always be distorted?

The descriptions of our reality or experiences is really what we are agreeing or disagreeing about. It has nothing to do with the actual experience of each individual because there is no way to directly share that (depending on what you believe, of course) and so it is entirely descriptions that we use to communicate and share our experiences.

The experience of an individual is also what is used to relate the experience of an individual. There is nothing else available. So yes, it has everything to do with it. And there is a difference between an experience which is more distorted than another as far as its ability to relate something of value to those seeking less distortion of that nature.

The relativism hand-waving thing becomes an absurdity at a point when relativism is actually accepted rather than being a significant contention of observed interaction. The idea of "acceptance" also transforms as distortion is lessened. For many here, what passes for acceptancr is obviously still an unconscious reaction from a perceived ego judgment (as they are still involves in balancing that aspect of yellow to a large degree). The frame is applied and used "as if", and bolstered by personal comfort and congruency with what is able to be accepted so far (which is often latched to a recognizable meme and there for largely unconscious)

Thank you for sharing this.

This very topic was on my mind for a long time on here, it was even in due part why i deleted my old account from the forums. I will say you have hit the nail on the head my friend. Its great to see this.

(02-07-2014, 02:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]The experience of an individual is also what is used to relate the experience of an individual. There is nothing else available. So yes, it has everything to do with it. And there is a difference between an experience which is more distorted than another as far as its ability to relate something of value to those seeking less distortion of that nature.

The relativism hand-waving thing becomes an absurdity at a point when relativism is actually accepted rather than being a significant contention of observed interaction. The idea of "acceptance" also transforms as distortion is lessened. For many here, what passes for acceptancr is obviously still an unconscious reaction from a perceived ego judgment (as they are still involves in balancing that aspect of yellow to a large degree). The frame is applied and used "as if", and bolstered by personal comfort and congruency with what is able to be accepted so far (which is often latched to a recognizable meme and there for largely unconscious)

You say here, "obviously still an unconscious reaction", to whom is this obviousness apparent and if it is apparently obvious to one but not to another, whom can be said to be perceiving with "less distortion"?

I agree with much of what you say, most of the time, ZM, but what I have never figured out from your explanations is what is the objective measure of distortion as related to the descriptions of individuals' experiences, and what qualifies one to describe the apparent blockages of another?

I am not asking to be facetious, but it is an actual concern of mine from the standpoint of being a healer who is often asked to give an assessment from my perspective of another's state.

I believe that the quote from Ra used in the OP changes meaning when removed from the context of the Ra material. The full question and answer:

Quote:Questioner: I am assuming it is not necessary for an individual to understand the Law of One to go from third to fourth density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.

Don asks very specifically about understanding the Law of One, not about general understanding. There are many points in the Ra material where Ra acknowledges Don's understanding, asks Don to understand something, or points out requirements to understand other concepts within 3rd density. What Ra is saying in this particular question is that an entity must consciously realize it does not understand the Law of One in order for it to be harvestable.

This is made clearer in other parts of the material, such as when Ra describes the necessity of the veil. Take the poker game analogy for instance:

Quote:This game can only be won by those who lose their cards in the melting influence of love; can only be won by those who lay their pleasures, their limitations, their all upon the table face up and say inwardly: “All, all of you players, each other-self, whatever your hand, I love you.” This is the game: to know, to accept, to forgive, to balance, and to open the self in love. This cannot be done without the forgetting, for it would carry no weight in the life of the mind/body/spirit beingness totality.

If an entity believes it understands the Law of One, it is bypassing the most essential part of our experience here - that we have forgotten that all things are One. We cannot understand true unity in this reality because this reality was designed for us to not understand. Thus, believing we understand hinders, rather than helps, our progress to the next density.

To address the true heart of the OP, while it's true that we're all here to discuss a text which proclaims itself to be given by an alien society from Venus, this does not in any way mean we have to accept that it comes from such a source to discuss it. The internal philosophy of the text is consistent enough to spawn interesting discussion about some of the core questions many people have about life.

To say that everything is a personal truth simply doesn't hold up in our shared reality. If you take several entities who believe they are the only Jesus Christ walking upon the Earth again (such entities do exist), and put them into a room together, will they see each other? Is one's belief that they are the true Jesus (personal truth) compatible with another's? These personal realities clash and are not compatible. Sure, each may exist within their individual reality, but wouldn't it be more useful to consider the fact that there is a reality shared by each individual which is not 100% subject to the individual's truth?

Some people have emptied their bank accounts due to the fact that they considered an imminent rapture "truth," and yet their personal truth did them no good come the following day. Many people held strong to the "truth" that on December 21, 2012, we would be harvested, ascend to 4D bodies, and all pain and suffering would be gone. On December 22, there was some panic and confusion, many "personal truths" crumbled due to the fact that expectations were not met. What did these personal truths hold sway to? If there is not a shared reality, whether we call it objective or inter-subjective, then what happened to these personal truths?

This is the basis for sharing our subjective experiences, and then questioning and discussing with each other these subjective experiences. When being questioned about an instant ascension in 2012, some would evade, some would be defensive, and some would proclaim that it is their personal truth and thus it will come true. If, perhaps, they were to openly discuss their perspective with the willingness to admit that what they labeled as "truth" may be an artifact of their desires, biases, or distortions, then perhaps they could have processed such catalyst in a calmer environment, on their own terms, rather than be met with the crueler catalyst of disappointment on December 23rd.

I have never seen a case where searching for a basis of belief in one's worldview as it applies to circumstance was not a fruitful effort. I have seen where unacknowledged, dishonest understanding was used as the basis of "acceptance" and "loving intention" and from such a distorted, sick position, used to misframe what constitutes healthy, ethical behavior. In every such circumstance of misevaluation, experience for the basis of the disagreement was utterly ignored or bypassed to satisfy a disowned apprehension.

Everything we perceive is constructed by our senses internally. The 'stuff' it senses - the noumenon - is unknown to us through experience.

We can't prove that anything external to us even exists. Which I think is the beauty and sentiment of oneness; it doesn't. It's us - the Creator - having that single experience.

(02-07-2014, 03:02 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]I have never seen a case where searching for a basis of belief in one's worldview as it applies to circumstance was not a fruitful effort. I have seen where unacknowledged, dishonest understanding was used as the basis of "acceptance" and "loving intention" and from such a distorted, sick position, used to misframe what constitutes healthy, ethical behavior. In every such circumstance of misevaluation, experience for the basis of the disagreement was utterly ignored or bypassed to satisfy a disowned apprehension.

Could you reword this or give an example of what you mean?

Quote:That's assuming that your path is the correct and only path. There are many themes that people incarnate to explore, we cannot posit to understand them purely from our own viewpoint. Each is on their own journey. There is also a fine line when proffering one's truth without being asked; bordering between who it actually serves better. There was a fantastic discussion regarding that on this forum a couple of years ago, I'll see if I can find it.

Not at all, there stages of development though. "One's truth" is just the individual's outlook, which i agree should be respected but can also be wildly inaccurate.

(02-07-2014, 02:41 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2014, 02:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]The experience of an individual is also what is used to relate the experience of an individual. There is nothing else available. So yes, it has everything to do with it. And there is a difference between an experience which is more distorted than another as far as its ability to relate something of value to those seeking less distortion of that nature.

The relativism hand-waving thing becomes an absurdity at a point when relativism is actually accepted rather than being a significant contention of observed interaction. The idea of "acceptance" also transforms as distortion is lessened. For many here, what passes for acceptancr is obviously still an unconscious reaction from a perceived ego judgment (as they are still involves in balancing that aspect of yellow to a large degree). The frame is applied and used "as if", and bolstered by personal comfort and congruency with what is able to be accepted so far (which is often latched to a recognizable meme and there for largely unconscious)

You say here, "obviously still an unconscious reaction", to whom is this obviousness apparent and if it is apparently obvious to one but not to another, whom can be said to be perceiving with "less distortion"?

Less distortion is available after lessons learned which offered the acceptance necessary to transcend and include a prior condition. You know how adults watching children know, in general, how they are engaged in their influences? Exact same thing.

(02-07-2014, 02:41 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with much of what you say, most of the time, ZM, but what I have never figured out from your explanations is what is the objective measure of distortion as related to the descriptions of individuals' experiences, and what qualifies one to describe the apparent blockages of another?

I am not asking to be facetious, but it is an actual concern of mine from the standpoint of being a healer who is often asked to give an assessment from my perspective of another's state.

It's just psychology and experience in recognizing shared patterns of behavior which are an expression of values, joy, suffering and struggle. If you are serious about being a healer, you don't have to study psychology, but it would be worthwhile to examine your own condition, your symbols, collective symbols, and mythology. These things are borrowed and expressed in different ways by individuals, but the underlying themes are always the same because they are collective in nature.

---

(02-07-2014, 03:03 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2014, 03:02 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]I have never seen a case where searching for a basis of belief in one's worldview as it applies to circumstance was not a fruitful effort. I have seen where unacknowledged, dishonest understanding was used as the basis of "acceptance" and "loving intention" and from such a distorted, sick position, used to misframe what constitutes healthy, ethical behavior. In every such circumstance of misevaluation, experience for the basis of the disagreement was utterly ignored or bypassed to satisfy a disowned apprehension.

Could you reword this or give an example of what you mean?

When we make a claim or have an opportunity to provide opinion, judgment, or insight we always have an ability to know if that which we are drawing from had been acknowledged, accepted, and assessed fully (owned) and if not, why not. That standpoint will always offer the least amount of distortion and the most teaching and learning opportunity. Same thing with assessing emotional reaction and withdrawing projections before making a post. If you are projecting, then you are also necessarily lazily inhibiting a more valuable learning opportunity.
My main point is that it is always possible to recognize when we do not actually know something, when we are called to provide some experience which is simply not there. We are in an "unprepared" or "unaccountable" state yet we tragically go on to fill in the blanks instead with desires, projection or bullshit - such as the bullshit that saturates these forums.

(02-08-2014, 10:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]We are in an "unprepared" or "unaccountable" state yet we tragically go on to fill in the blanks instead with desires, projection or bullshit - such as the bullshit that saturates these forums.

Why do we do this?

(02-08-2014, 11:26 PM)Folk-love Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 10:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]We are in an "unprepared" or "unaccountable" state yet we tragically go on to fill in the blanks instead with desires, projection or bullshit - such as the bullshit that saturates these forums.

Why do we do this?

Laziness. The path of least resistance.

(02-08-2014, 11:39 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 11:26 PM)Folk-love Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 10:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]We are in an "unprepared" or "unaccountable" state yet we tragically go on to fill in the blanks instead with desires, projection or bullshit - such as the bullshit that saturates these forums.

Why do we do this?

Laziness. The path of least resistance.

That simple huh. It sometimes boggles my mind how often I choose this path when putting in even the slightest bit of effort would reward me greatly. Any advice for how to overcome this?

(02-08-2014, 11:42 PM)Folk-love Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 11:39 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 11:26 PM)Folk-love Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2014, 10:32 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]We are in an "unprepared" or "unaccountable" state yet we tragically go on to fill in the blanks instead with desires, projection or bullshit - such as the bullshit that saturates these forums.

Why do we do this?

Laziness. The path of least resistance.

That simple huh. It sometimes boggles my mind how often I choose this path when putting in even the slightest bit of effort would reward me greatly. Any advice for how to overcome this?

Develop the will. "The Act of Will" by Roberto Assagioli. Incidentally, he was credited with coining the term "Higher Self" which is used throughout the Ra Material.

"There is no experience which is not purchased by effort of some kind, no act of service to self or others which does not bear a price, to the entity manifesting, commensurate with its purity. All things in manifestation may be seen in one way or another to be offering themselves in order that transformations may take place upon the level appropriate to the action."

"Acceptance of self, forgiveness of self, and the direction of the will; this is the path towards the disciplined personality. Your faculty of will is that which is powerful within you as co-Creator. You cannot ascribe to this faculty too much importance. Thus it must be carefully used and directed in service to others for those upon the positively oriented path."