Text attacking Law of One and Ra Material

[rva_jeremy]

I know sometimes I reject schools of thought based on a cursory review of the concepts, letting whatever knee-jerk reaction to my first, short understanding is settle the matter. This is of course totally unfair, but I acknowledge it's a human thing to do. When one finds something challenging, it's natural to want to shut it down and move on, and it takes effort to avoid that behavior. That is very much what this sounds like, because there are several parts that are like "I don't really know if this is what they mean, but I'm going to interpret it in the way that's easiest to reject."

The way the author discusses the concepts leads me to believe that he or she, like Gary said, has contemplated the kinds of concepts those of Ra discuss. He or she simply doesn't want to engage with those of Ra's wording and representation of them. That's totally cool, and it's important that we realize Ra's diction asks much of a reader. I don't blame anybody for not wanting to digest Ra's wording.

I agree with Gary that there is some rigidity of thought here ("bad guys") that lends itself in my experience towards rejecting the Law of One as taking insufficiently strident, seemingly detached, or unacceptably amoral positions on the big questions. That's totally cool, too. I have a relative who knows enough about the Law of One to know it's not really for her. Thankfully we have both worked to ensure it doesn't prevent us from walking our paths and sharing our truths with each other.