10-05-2010, 07:55 PM
You didn't address the fact that Ra used the term intensity of light in regards to the pre-veil harvest.
I don't think Ra did talk about two different types of harvest. The steps of light quote from session 82 is basically just a restatement of the intensity of light quote from session 6.
Furthermore, your argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding. The requirements for harvest are set by the Logos, not by the sub-Logos. The sub-Logoi can decide to veil or not to veil in their design of third density, but it whether they veil or not doesn't change the nature of the harvest. As Ra said, "the requirements of harvest are set." (89.45) And again, "the biasing mechanisms cannot change the requirements for achieving harvestability either in the positive or in the negative sense." (90.23). I couldn't quickly find a quote to this effect, but it's clear that just as the biasing mechanisms can't change the requirements for achieving harvestability, neither can the veiling or lack thereof.
You seem to have formed the idea that the lessons of third density were different before the veil from what they are now. This is incorrect. From session 82:
"The first beings of mind, body, and spirit were not complex. The experience of mind/body/spirits at the beginning of this octave of experience was singular. There was no third-density forgetting. There was no veil. The lessons of third density are predestined by the very nature of the vibratory rates experienced during this particular density and by the nature of the quantum jump to the vibratory experiences of fourth density."
And again:
"Your queries seem to be pursuing the possibility/probability that the mechanisms of experience in third density are different if a mind/body/spirit is attempting them rather than a mind/body/spirit complex. The nature of third density is constant. Its ways are to be learned the same now and ever. Thusly, no matter what form the entity facing these lessons, the lessons and mechanisms are the same."
And again:
"82.21 Questioner: Then even though, from our point of view, there was great evolutionary experience it was deemed at some point by the evolving Logos that an experiment to create a greater experience was appropriate. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct and may benefit from comment. The Logos is aware of the nature of the third-density requirement for what you have called graduation. All the previous, if you would use this term, experiments, although resulting in many experiences, lacked what was considered the crucial ingredient; that is, polarization. There was little enough tendency for experience to polarize entities that entities repeated habitually the third-density cycles many times over. It was desired that the potential for polarization be made more available."
I don't think Ra did talk about two different types of harvest. The steps of light quote from session 82 is basically just a restatement of the intensity of light quote from session 6.
Furthermore, your argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding. The requirements for harvest are set by the Logos, not by the sub-Logos. The sub-Logoi can decide to veil or not to veil in their design of third density, but it whether they veil or not doesn't change the nature of the harvest. As Ra said, "the requirements of harvest are set." (89.45) And again, "the biasing mechanisms cannot change the requirements for achieving harvestability either in the positive or in the negative sense." (90.23). I couldn't quickly find a quote to this effect, but it's clear that just as the biasing mechanisms can't change the requirements for achieving harvestability, neither can the veiling or lack thereof.
You seem to have formed the idea that the lessons of third density were different before the veil from what they are now. This is incorrect. From session 82:
"The first beings of mind, body, and spirit were not complex. The experience of mind/body/spirits at the beginning of this octave of experience was singular. There was no third-density forgetting. There was no veil. The lessons of third density are predestined by the very nature of the vibratory rates experienced during this particular density and by the nature of the quantum jump to the vibratory experiences of fourth density."
And again:
"Your queries seem to be pursuing the possibility/probability that the mechanisms of experience in third density are different if a mind/body/spirit is attempting them rather than a mind/body/spirit complex. The nature of third density is constant. Its ways are to be learned the same now and ever. Thusly, no matter what form the entity facing these lessons, the lessons and mechanisms are the same."
And again:
"82.21 Questioner: Then even though, from our point of view, there was great evolutionary experience it was deemed at some point by the evolving Logos that an experiment to create a greater experience was appropriate. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct and may benefit from comment. The Logos is aware of the nature of the third-density requirement for what you have called graduation. All the previous, if you would use this term, experiments, although resulting in many experiences, lacked what was considered the crucial ingredient; that is, polarization. There was little enough tendency for experience to polarize entities that entities repeated habitually the third-density cycles many times over. It was desired that the potential for polarization be made more available."