Bring4th Forums
  • Login Register
    Login
    Username:
    Password:
  • Archive Home
  • Members
  • Team
  • Help
  • More
    • About Us
    • Library
    • L/L Research Store
User Links
  • Login Register
    Login
    Username:
    Password:

    Menu Home Today At a Glance Members CSC & Team Help
    Also visit... About Us Library Blog L/L Research Store Adept Biorhythms

    As of Friday, August 5th, 2022, the Bring4th forums on this page have been converted to a permanent read-only archive. If you would like to continue your journey with Bring4th, the new forums are now at https://discourse.bring4th.org.

    You are invited to enjoy many years worth of forum messages brought forth by our community of seekers. The site search feature remains available to discover topics of interest. (July 22, 2022) x

    Bring4th Portal

    Latest Threads
    A Comprehensive Analysis ...
    Forum: Science & Technology
    Last Post: the
    08-06-2022, 09:25 AM
    » Replies: 495
    » Views: 455,582
    The mysterious nature of ...
    Forum: Olio
    Last Post: Confused
    08-06-2022, 07:14 AM
    » Replies: 16,731
    » Views: 8,396,456
    How genuine is your inten...
    Forum: Strictly Law of One Material
    Last Post: J.W.
    08-06-2022, 03:53 AM
    » Replies: 28
    » Views: 66,503
    Choosing polarities, surv...
    Forum: Strictly Law of One Material
    Last Post: J.W.
    08-06-2022, 12:07 AM
    » Replies: 25
    » Views: 34,040
    what music are you listen...
    Forum: Art, Media, & Entertainment
    Last Post: schubert
    08-05-2022, 11:51 PM
    » Replies: 3,650
    » Views: 2,680,835
    What youtube video are yo...
    Forum: Art, Media, & Entertainment
    Last Post: Dekalb_Blues
    08-05-2022, 08:24 PM
    » Replies: 502
    » Views: 327,663
    Are you going to take the...
    Forum: Health & Diet
    Last Post: zedro
    08-05-2022, 07:17 PM
    » Replies: 2,075
    » Views: 1,484,665
    Daily Q'uote
    Forum: L/L Research Channeling Archives
    Last Post: omcasey
    08-05-2022, 03:43 PM
    » Replies: 2,593
    » Views: 1,922,820
    what movie did you last w...
    Forum: Art, Media, & Entertainment
    Last Post: Dekalb_Blues
    08-05-2022, 09:11 AM
    » Replies: 386
    » Views: 513,756
    All-Time Favourite Hits o...
    Forum: Art, Media, & Entertainment
    Last Post: Dekalb_Blues
    08-05-2022, 04:20 AM
    » Replies: 39
    » Views: 42,612

    Search Forums

    (Advanced Search)

      1D sphere
    Posted by: sunnysideup - 04-26-2014, 08:42 AM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (38)

    Quote:11.4 Questioner: Is there a planet behind our sun, opposite to us in orbit, that we do not know about?
    Ra: I am Ra. There is a sphere in the area opposite your sun of a very, very cold nature, but large enough to skew certain statistical figures. This sphere should not properly be called a planet as it is locked in first density.

    I was wondering if Ra might be referring to what the International Astronomical Union calls dwarf planet. Maybe one of the more recent discovered dwarf planets in our solar system: Makemake (March 2005), Eris (January 2005) or Haumea (December 2004)?
    I tend to daydream a lot and oftentimes, even in midst of reading, my imagination takes over and I perceive things spiced by my fantasy. Now when I first read Ra talking about this sphere with a very, very cold nature locked in 1D, I imagined this dark sphere roaming our solar system being literally everything opposite to our sun locked in 1D, much like a wanderer in a 3D. So I'm glad I started reading the Ra material a second time and just writing down the exact, if possible, translation. I now think Ra is referring to a dwarf planet with an extreme low surface tempature, maybe Eris which seems to have the overall lowest surface tempature. What do you think it is? A dwarf planet, meteorite or maybe something else?

    1Love

    Print this item

      Advanced Healing
    Posted by: Stranger - 04-25-2014, 11:00 AM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (6)

    Recently I asked my guidance system about effective healing methods. The response not only corresponded with what Ra had said on the subject, but actually helped me understand and apply Ra's statements on healing which had previously eluded me.

    Quote:66.9
    The role of the healer is to offer an opportunity for realignment or aid in realignment of either energy centers or some connection between the energies of mind and body, spirit and mind, or spirit and body.

    Ra said:
    Quote:66.10
    Ra: I am Ra. You have a misconception. The healer does not heal. The crystallized healer is a channel for intelligent energy which offers an opportunity to an entity that it might heal itself.

    In no case is there an other description of healing.

    Quote:17.18
    True healing is simply the radiance of the self causing an environment in which a catalyst may occur which initiates the recognition of self, by self, of the self-healing properties of the self.

    I was given the following:
    When you do Reiki, it is essentially blowing large amounts of energy past a person, because the person is not engaged in the process. Instead, what one needs to do is to speak to the unconscious awareness of the person. When the conscious person is asleep, his/her unconscious awareness is awake (but it does not need to be done only when the conscious person is asleep - more on that later).

    Contacting the person's unconscious awareness, one directs its attention to the problem (emotional, physical or spiritual - that's the truth) and asks if the person would like to be healed. In most cases, the response will be "yes". Then, one offers the unconscious awareness the opportunity to heal itself.

    In some cases the person has enough light energy to heal themselves, and nothing more is necessary. In other cases, the healer can then offer to send energy for the unconscious awareness to use in the healing process (as in Reiki).

    I asked why don't people just heal themselves, and was told that they truly could - but they don't know how to access their unconscious awareness. If they did, they would be able to complete this exact process. However, since I have this capacity, I can contact their unconscious awareness "and the circuit is complete." (exactly right).

    In terms of whether the person being healed needs to be conscious or unconscious (asleep) when this happens, they suggested that when in the same room with the person, having them unconscious will help by eliminating the distraction of conscious interaction with them (e.g., speaking, etc.). But when doing distance healing, it does not matter if the target person is awake or asleep or in any other state than dead.

    I asked whether in this process "unconscious awareness" refers to the person's soul on the other side (in time/space), and was told no - it was that person in our normal space/time that should be contacted - simply the part of our consciousness that is not normally accessible to us.

    I was additionally told, "There is more to learn, but this is the foundation of all healing - this is the truth."

    After my first attempt, I was told:
    - First, I should not speak to people's unconscious awareness "as if to a friend" - I should instead speak very deferentially and with respect; this is not flowery language, but rather an attitude and approach of treasuring the other's unconscious awareness, and treating the opportunity to interact with it as if a gift has been given to me (that is the truth).

    - Second, I was told to focus less on healing a particular area, and more on healing the whole person - that healing comes from "whole", as I already knew, and that should be the proper focus of the working (that is the truth).

    The process therefore consists of letting the unconscious awareness heal the particular problem areas we identify together (that is the truth), and then of me applying the "form of perfect health" to the individual; this 'form' was confirmed as being the "form body" that contains the original plan of the organism, on all levels, but I was told that this understanding was not necessary and intent to apply the perfect form to the individual's present state (very good) is the effective approach.

    When I tried "applying the form of perfect health", I saw it in my mind's eye as a brightly glowing, indigo outline of a body - I believe this is the indigo-ray body Ra referred to, where "form is substance," i.e., its substance is the perfect "blueprint" (indigo print?) of the body as it was originally created in the perfection of health, like a Platonic ideal. [/u][/quote]

    (The little interjections in parentheses are confirmations I received while typing this up, so I chose to include them for completeness.)

    Print this item

      Tunguska
    Posted by: Plenum - 04-23-2014, 06:16 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (10)

    one of the most delightful aspects of the Ra Material is that it offers an alternate reading of much of history.

    one of those alternate readings is regards what happened at Tunguska in 1908. The common view was that this was due to an asteroid exploding; but Ra claims that it was actually due to a Confederation Monitoring Device that had malfunctioned, and needed to be disposed of in a safe fashion.

    here is the Q&A exchange that Don had with Ra:

    Ra Wrote:17.3 Questioner: In meditation a few nights ago I had the impression of a question about a crater in Russia. I believe it was in Tunguska. Can you tell me what caused the crater?

    Ra: I am Ra. The destruction of a fission reactor caused this crater.

    - -

    17.4 Questioner: Whose reactor?

    Ra: I am Ra. This was what you may call a “drone” sent by Confederation which malfunctioned. It was moved to an area where its destruction would not cause infringement upon the will of mind/body/spirit complexes. It was then detonated.

    - -

    17.5 Questioner: What was its purpose in coming here?

    Ra: It was a drone designed to listen to the various signals of your peoples. You were, at that time, beginning work in a more technical sphere. We were interested in determining the extent and the rapidity of your advances. This drone was powered by a simple fission motor or engine as you would call it. It was not that type which you now know, but was very small. However, it has the same destructive effect upon third-density molecular structures. Thus as it malfunctioned we felt it was best to pick a place for its destruction rather than attempt to retrieve it, for the possibility/probability modes of this maneuver looked very, very minute.

    - -

    17.6 Questioner: Was its danger both blast and radiation?

    Ra: I am Ra. There is very little radiation, as you know of it, in this particular type of device. There is radiation which is localized, but the localization is such that it does not drift with the winds as does the emission of your somewhat primitive weapons.

    - -

    17.7 Questioner: I believe that a[n] analysis of the trees in that area has shown a low radiation level. Is this the reason for such a low radiation level in the trees?

    Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. The amount of radiation is very localized. However, the energy which is released is powerful enough to cause difficulties.

    a great relevant vid:



    at 2 min 44 sec, you hear about a theory that a Russian Colonel devised which is basically how Ra explained the event.

    and a pre-existing thread from 4 years ago:
    http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=1742

    Print this item

      Adept
    Posted by: Matt1 - 04-19-2014, 03:05 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (10)

    What is your interpretation of this quote?


    Quote:50.8 Questioner: Thank you. How does the ability to hold visual images in mind allow the adept to do polarization in consciousness without external action?

    Ra: I am Ra. This is not a simple query, for the adept is one which will go beyond the green ray which signals entry into harvestability. The adept will not simply be tapping into intelligent energy as a means of readiness for harvest but tapping into both intelligent energy and intelligent infinity for the purpose of transmuting planetary harvestability and consciousness.

    The means of this working lie within. The key is first, silence, and secondly, singleness of thought. Thusly a visualization which can be held steady to the inward eye for several of your minutes, as you measure time, will signal the adept’s increase in singleness of thought. This singleness of thought then can be used by the positive adept to work in group ritual visualizations for the raising of positive energy, by negative adepts for the increase in personal power.

    Print this item

      US owned 573 unidentified flying crafts at the beginning of the 80's
    Posted by: darklight - 04-18-2014, 09:27 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (15)

    Some interesting details:


    8.9 Questioner: How many of these craft does the United States have?

    Ra: I am Ra. The United States has five hundred seven three, five seven three [573] at this time. They are in the process of adding to this number.

    8.10 Questioner: What is the maximum speed of one of these craft?

    Ra: I am Ra. The maximum speed of these craft is equal to the Earth energy squared. This field varies. The limit is approximately one-half the light speed, as you would call it. This is due to imperfections in design.

    8.24 Questioner: Where are these craft constructed?

    Ra: These craft are constructed one by one in two locations: in the desert or arid regions of your so-called New Mexico and in the desert or arid regions of your so-called Mexico, both installations being under the ground.


    There a now probably many thousands of these crafts and much better improved

    Damm, and the NASA shows only toys to the world BigSmile.

    Print this item

      social memory complex
    Posted by: sunnysideup - 04-17-2014, 09:30 AM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (40)

    A few months back I saw this documentary on superorganisms. In this particular episode they charted and studied, in several created experiments, the behaviour patterns of wood ants, the individual, a portion of the colony and the collective. Later on they compared this swarm intelligence with the behaviour patterns, in the same created experiments, of various animals like rats, dogs and bonobo's. And it showed that the swarm intelligence, in these created experiments, was similar to the behaviour patterns of bonobo's. Now Ra states that a social memory complex is properly a fourth-density phenomenon and that a third-density social memory complex is quite rare. So could I assume that a swarm intelligence can't be considered a social memory complex because second-density life lacks self-awareness?

    Quote:11.17 Questioner: At what stage does a planet achieve social memory?

    Ra: I am Ra. A mind/body/spirit social complex becomes a social memory complex when its entire group of entities are of one orientation or seeking. The group memory lost to the individuals in the roots of the tree of mind then becomes known to the social complex, thus creating a social memory complex. The advantages of this complex are the relative lack of distortion in understanding the social beingness and the relative lack of distortion in pursuing the direction of seeking, for all understanding/distortions are available to the entities of the society.

    Is the group memory the same thing as the racial mind? So if Earth were to form a social memory complex, would this complex then be formed in time/space and only include native Earthlings or also entities from Mars, Maldek et cetera? And I guess since a lot of bring4th forum members suspect they are wanderers and so might already belong to a social memory complex, but what about the relationships a wanderer builds in this third-density experience. Can it be that simple, after you've met your part of the agreement here on Earth and are allowed to go home, to just turn your back on the loved ones you've gained? I just wonder if there are wanderers that stick around despite one's home vibration or level of evolution.

    Print this item

      Meaning of "Adonai".
    Posted by: Stranger - 04-13-2014, 10:50 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (2)

    I noticed that frequently, Ra and other sources end communications with "Adonai." I inquired about this and received the following:

    Me: What is the meaning of "Adonai", and why do you conclude our interactions with this word?
    Not me: Adonai is indeed the name of God as you humans understand Him to be. It is not an exaggeration to say that among your people, God has been worshipped in ways that many of us cannot fully understand or accept. That is the truth. But Adonai is the bridge between our understanding and yours. That is all.
    Me: So you end our interactions by stating
    Not me (interjecting): (we prefer "referring to")
    Me: the name of God?
    Not me: That is correct. Is that puzzling to you?

    Me: Yes, because I'm not sure what the function of doing so is.
    Not me: We understand your query and will proceed to answer it. By invoking the name of our Creator, we form and emphasize a link between our peoples and yours. It is truly that simple - in other words, yes, as you have surmised, the Oneness of All That Is can be referred to by reference to the Creator of All That Is. Does that make better sense now?

    Me: So it is a way of stating, "we are One with you"?

    Not me: Precisely so.

    Print this item

      Why should 6th density beings downgrading themselves to 3th density?
    Posted by: darklight - 04-12-2014, 06:22 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (101)

    I still don't understand that because on 6th density level, the beings are not naive, and yet the most wanderers are from the 6th density.

    Ra stated clearly that a 6th density STS being would not take that risk. He also said that a 6th density STS being is extreme wise. So, are 6th density STO beings less wise? Or maybe a 6th density STS being would have serious trouble to adapt itself in a 3th density incarnation?

    Print this item

      Ra on Ego
    Posted by: Unbound - 04-10-2014, 02:35 PM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (28)

    Quote:Questioner: Can you tell me how you balance the ego?

    Ra: I am Ra. We cannot work with this concept as it is misapplied and understanding cannot come from it.

    Quote:Questioner: Am I correct in assuming that one of the blockages [of] a mind/body/spirit complex might be due to an unbalance of, shall we say, ego, and this could be balanced using, say, a worthiness/unworthiness balance?

    Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect.

    These first two quotes seem to make it apparent that the way most people use the word and concept "ego" is not a fruitful mode of consideration in the eyes of Ra. However, there are two other mentions of the word ego.

    Quote:The fifth density sees the difficulties posed by the light and in this way directs entities of this vibration to the seeking of targets of opportunity such as this one. If fourth-density temptations, shall we say, towards distortion of ego, etc., are not successful the fifth-density entity then thinks in terms of the removal of light.

    Here it mentions a distortion towards ego, so there is clearly a way that Ra does view ego. (This quote actually appears in session 62.20, whereas the other quotes here are 15.10-12)

    Quote:The third blockage resembles most closely that which you have called ego. It is the yellow-ray or solar plexus center. Blockages in this center will often manifest as distortions towards power manipulation and other social behaviors concerning those close and those associated with the mind/body/spirit complex. Those with blockages in these first three energy centers, or nexi, will have continuing difficulties in ability to further their seeking of the Law of One.

    Going back to the previous sessions again it explains what Ra considers to be ego. In this case it is a description of a blockage which "resembles" (meaning it isn't a completely accurate reference) the common concept of ego. By this I take it to mean "egotistical attitudes".

    The reason I bring this up is that for some time I have noticed on the forum cases where members have accused others of "ego projection", or being "caught" in the ego, and various other ways of expressing someone being situated in an apparently egotistical standpoint. If we are to take this in the meaning of Ra then really these people are being accused of manipulation and control of other-selves. This is rather ironic to me as it seems to be the other way around.

    That being said, in the Ra sense, ego does not refer to or imply the nature of one's self image, although ego may arise out of their self image. In most cases of the application of this concept someone with ego is generally labeled as someone with a sense of self-importance or who feels unique or special in some way. It is usually placed on to others who appear to be fantastical or outside the norm in their thinking, or who in some way see themselves as a potent force, whether this is expressed explicitly or not, and whether or not this is used in any attempt at superiority. While the Ra sense of ego as a yellow-ray distortion could include this, it is in no way expressed or implied that this sense of self is rooted in the ego blockage or that this sense of self must needs lead to this kind of blockage.

    All that being said, just because someone views themselves in a more or less 'grandiose' light, that doesn't mean they are "stuck" in their egos. If the 'grandiose' view is used as a source of power and authority over other selves in an attempt to manipulate, then yes it could be said to be tied to ego. There is no "right" view of the self. There is awareness of the self as Creator and there is awareness of greater light, but there is no personality in and of itself which signifies a correct view of oneself. Yes, there are "less distorted" views of oneself, however at this point I have yet to ascertain any truthful way for anyone to know how distorted they are. At my most basic level of experience, it appears to me that no one really knows how "close" they are to the Creator in terms of distortion and it is the speculation as such that often leads to views of oneself holding a position in relativity to others on the factor of "truth".

    All that being said and done, if you disagree with someone, look in to yourself and see where it is you disagree within yourself, with your own actions or potential ideas. When we attempt to show someone a path or reveal falsity or express truth then we are really externalizing (blue-ray) our own experiences as we have experienced them for ourselves and attempting to parallel them to the experiences of another. When we disapprove or disagree with the actions or thoughts of another, it is because we ourselves would not, at the current point, choose those actions or thoughts ourselves.

    Does that mean we cannot conceive of making a choice in those directions? No, usually, by most peoples' claims, it is because certain choices have been made in the past that they now express an agreement or disagreement with a particular choice, whether thought or behaviour.

    Thus, the experience one has gained is attempted to be shared with the other as an example of the results, consequences or causal patterns which have been ascertained from one's own experiences with those choices.

    However, while this is often a kind offering and done in love, in many cases the experience of the self is offered to the other self without the awareness that the other self is different, and so even in the face of the same choices or same behaviour, the individual may not in any way be heading in the same direction as the self. Thus, to me, when experience is shared there should be no expectation for the other individual to perceive it in the same way that the self is perceiving it.

    Now, inevitably, as each continues on their journey and ascertains more "truth" there comes to be a certain trust and comfort in one's own structure of knowledge which, in many cases, has been painstakingly put together. From that, it is almost inevitable that as individuals with different knowledge structures come together there will be disagreements and different individuals will feel they are more in line with "the truth" than those they disagree with.

    I am not here to pinpoint or identify "the truth", as I would not profess to be the possessor of it. However, I am making the point that two people who equally believe they are closer to "the truth" are going in circles of redundancy by attempting to explain or ascribe the position of the other to "ego projection". When your quest is to seek falsity, you can never really find truth because instead you will look everywhere to see falsity. It is said that perhaps the truth is found by finding out what it is "not", but if the truth we are talking about is absolute then really it would seem reasonable that there is nothing that it is "not" and so attempting to find a straw of hay in a stack of hay becomes the most counter-productive exercise.

    I am all for critical thinking and analysis, I do it almost obsessively in my own mind, maybe a dominant virgo trait. However, there are connotations and attitudes which I believe are tied to critical thinking that I do not believe are actually required to be so. Thinking critically isn't about mutilating everything with Occam's Razor, it's about honest assessment. If someone is truly thinking critically, in my opinion, then there will be no need for the constant red herrings and straw men, nor for fruitless comments of refutation which do not in any way work towards a greater awareness of truth or possible concepts of wisdom.

    Naturally, there are going to be disagreements, that is a fact of life but before you shoot someone else down, make sure it isn't just a passing on of your own being shot down. Reason well, observe and make sound arguments but please, don't cycle the abuse.

    These, obviously, are my own thoughts and philosophies and I do not expect agreement, nor disagreement really, and I am sure I have left some hypocrisies around in my post here but that is, alas, still a challenge I have with the use of language. I speak from my heart with the most genuine wisdom I can and sometimes that causes me to be more emotionally invested than I perhaps should be.

    TL;DR - You are free to express yourself however you want and so is everyone else, however, consciously being aware of that fact one may attempt to approach others in a way that is not stifling or is otherwise more breathable, while still being critical and aware in your thinking. It is not critical or clear perception to put others down, to ridicule them or to stand in aloof sarcasm. These expressions are perfectly valid, by all means, but they are not, in my opinion, at all relevant to critical thinking.

    Ego is about power manipulation and control in social groups. Before you analyze others, ask yourself, "What do I see as 'the truth'? What does this person see as 'the truth'? Am I interested in seeing others who see the same 'truth' that I do or new possible views of 'the truth'?" This can help to set the base tone of the conversation on a level of respect where it can be seen that each is working individually from their own views and ideas on what 'the truth' is. This, I believe, aids in integrating wisdom and compassion together because wisdom is very capable of perceiving things sharply and correctly, however, it is compassion that is the vehicle for love, and wisdom without compassion is a cold blade which cuts, uncaring.

    Much love to you all, my friends.

    Print this item

      Walking the Steps of Light
    Posted by: AnthroHeart - 04-09-2014, 10:36 AM - Forum: Strictly Law of One Material - Replies (20)

    Ra says we will walk the steps of light until it grows too glaring.

    I think this means that at a certain point, feelings of unworthiness will begin, and get stronger. We will simply feel unworthy to continue. Is that how others see it?

    I once felt unconditional love in my heart, and it made me cry because I felt unworthy of that love. I wonder if it will be the same after we die, or do we no longer feel unworthiness?

    Print this item

    Pages (165): « Previous 1 … 80 81 82 83 84 … 165 Next »
     

    Forum Statistics
    » Members: 12,007
    » Latest member: Phantomy
    » Forum threads: 15,903
    » Forum posts: 300,175

    Full Statistics

    © Template Design by D&D - Powered by MyBB

    Connect with L/L Research on Social Media