02-24-2021, 05:51 PM
I'll try that reversing, seems to work well here...
The classic old controversy is whether groups with too much of a New Age "just focus on love and light" bias set themselves up for failure by not wizening up enough to negative dynamics, or by generally shutting out reality too much.
Lots of people went to the Cassiopaea community because they were convinced that ignoring scary stuff and calling teachings which examine them "fear-based" was a cheap cop-out by the scared who simply want to hide from reality. (Such a view is also, in a nutshell, LKJ's view, which she argues for in her "The Wave" series and later writings.)
A kind of middle ground is exemplified by Montalk, who dives into matters of STS agendas without in the process becoming consumed by paranoia, or turning into an egomaniac. He doesn't lose sight of other stuff which e.g. LKJ dismisses or simply ignores while communities like this still explore them (while limiting focus in other ways).
That can happen in several ways.
Negative sources can hand out lots of attention-grabbing stuff which is practically useless, which mainly distracts.
Positive sources can end up receiving too limited a range of questions, or face an audience too closed-minded in some way to allow giving the most useful answers without infringing free will.
In the Ra contact, going by the "Re-listening Report" at lawofone.info, Ra probably wanted more exploration of archetypal mind matters -- maybe more of that sooner could have changed the trajectory of what happened, who knows? Ra quickened the pace and seemed eager about such topics.
Lots of LLR channeling prior to the Ra contact, and similar by other groups, got very repetitive. Sometimes, perhaps it's just practicing -- analogous to learning to play an instrument -- and later there was the Ra contact in LLR's case, but in many cases there's nothing more ever happening. Could be a variety of reasons for such patterns.
I also think it's got flaws. And I think the Cassiopaean material actually clarifies some basic things, left too fuzzy in the Ra material, and deals with at least some low-hanging fruit well in going further. But I think it also contains fairly obvious falsehood, and that the distortion it has is more harmful than that in the Ra material.
The questions of gaps and too-narrow focus is in relation to looking for broader and fuller "understanding". As a counterargument I would expect a case for, "nothing is truly missing", or simply a "I personally don't care", rather than talking about markets. However, I would plainly be wrong in expecting that if it is simply not a priority to try to understand reality in the community in general. (Makes sense for LLR without Don Elkins, may have been different if he had remained longer.)
(02-24-2021, 04:40 PM)Agua Wrote: I just realized you actually mentioned the lessening of "practical significance".
The classic old controversy is whether groups with too much of a New Age "just focus on love and light" bias set themselves up for failure by not wizening up enough to negative dynamics, or by generally shutting out reality too much.
Lots of people went to the Cassiopaea community because they were convinced that ignoring scary stuff and calling teachings which examine them "fear-based" was a cheap cop-out by the scared who simply want to hide from reality. (Such a view is also, in a nutshell, LKJ's view, which she argues for in her "The Wave" series and later writings.)
A kind of middle ground is exemplified by Montalk, who dives into matters of STS agendas without in the process becoming consumed by paranoia, or turning into an egomaniac. He doesn't lose sight of other stuff which e.g. LKJ dismisses or simply ignores while communities like this still explore them (while limiting focus in other ways).
(02-24-2021, 04:40 PM)Agua Wrote: Distortion or corruption would not only appear by giving wrong information.
It would also (and probably more often) appear by giving correct information, but in a way that has no relevance to actual personal growth.
Meaning, you can give people correct information but still keep them from evolving.
So the goal of negative interference would be reached in a very elegant way!
That can happen in several ways.
Negative sources can hand out lots of attention-grabbing stuff which is practically useless, which mainly distracts.
Positive sources can end up receiving too limited a range of questions, or face an audience too closed-minded in some way to allow giving the most useful answers without infringing free will.
In the Ra contact, going by the "Re-listening Report" at lawofone.info, Ra probably wanted more exploration of archetypal mind matters -- maybe more of that sooner could have changed the trajectory of what happened, who knows? Ra quickened the pace and seemed eager about such topics.
(02-24-2021, 04:40 PM)Agua Wrote: I just imagine a group of people gathering regularly,for channeling and then saying one evening "Oh, nothing substantial today, lets call it a day and try next time".
Lots of LLR channeling prior to the Ra contact, and similar by other groups, got very repetitive. Sometimes, perhaps it's just practicing -- analogous to learning to play an instrument -- and later there was the Ra contact in LLR's case, but in many cases there's nothing more ever happening. Could be a variety of reasons for such patterns.
(02-24-2021, 04:40 PM)Agua Wrote: As for "the material was never corrupted", assuming you speak of the Ra material:
I surely cannot judge if it is corrupted or not.
But definetely I am aware of distortions it has.
Believing blindly in an infallibility or divine purées,of any channeled material would make you very blind to the distortions it has.
That would probably also be a,potential temptation for a channeled, I guess.
However, this is much more the reader's responsibility to discern than the channelers.
I also think it's got flaws. And I think the Cassiopaean material actually clarifies some basic things, left too fuzzy in the Ra material, and deals with at least some low-hanging fruit well in going further. But I think it also contains fairly obvious falsehood, and that the distortion it has is more harmful than that in the Ra material.
(02-24-2021, 04:40 PM)Agua Wrote: I don't believe anybody involved in either the Ra contact, or Quo channelings or B4 Forum views this as a market.
So, it wouldn't be really relevant, if someone else fills a perceived gap.
The questions of gaps and too-narrow focus is in relation to looking for broader and fuller "understanding". As a counterargument I would expect a case for, "nothing is truly missing", or simply a "I personally don't care", rather than talking about markets. However, I would plainly be wrong in expecting that if it is simply not a priority to try to understand reality in the community in general. (Makes sense for LLR without Don Elkins, may have been different if he had remained longer.)