Courting the maiden

[Night Owl]

How have you assumed I have never been in love? That is harsh.

Actually I thought ricdaw's post was incredible I couldn't believe how it was simply discarted as such. That may be the source of the negativity you perceived. Have I done a shorter post it would probably not have been the case. I'll stay away from too long posts now.

I would agree I don't have a romanticized relationship with everything that surrounds me or my intuition but I also don't think I plunder the ressources of my mind. Maybe you are in love with everything that you are but I would not fall in love with myself. It feels more like partnership to me. I see courting myself as increasing seperation and partnership as more decreasing it.

The way I see it, the LOO is not a bible. Ra gives us keys so we can elaborate ourselves. I think you wanted people to discuss this with you, otherwise you would have simply posted the session in it's entirety. So I don't think this discussion is problematic so far. I have no harsh feelings towards you. I don't have a problem with your answers either. I'm simply discussing. Discussing means to consider or examine by argument, comment, etc.; talk over or write about, especially to explore solutions; debate: I think that is what is going on. It's not like I don't learn anything I find this process to be interesting and fruitful so far.

[Jade]

I thought you mentioned something about "once before" but being bogged down by the courting process or something, but I apologize, I may have confused a Minya post. But I didn't mean it harshly, I just don't see how you could have problems with words like "affection" and "adoration" if you'd been exposed to the concept. Maybe I am just totally off base. And maybe I am just confusing you two because you are responding in tandem to my posts to the other, heh, so it's hard to keep my own arguments separate when you are both arguing subtly different things.

And I agree that this process is fruitful and I am enjoying it greatly as well, so I'm sad if that has been miscommunicated to each other. I'm happy to talk about it forever, but I'm at a loss where to go when someone comes in and says the analogy doesn't resonate with them because, well, that is what I'm trying to talk about: The analogy per Ra. So I'm happy to discuss with you too where you feel differently but at the same time I feel like you're arguing with me when I'm really just regurgitating the Ra concepts that you seem to disagree with. But Ra said some very specific things about the card that I feel haven't been addressed properly by either of you, with or without romanticizing the card. Yes, it is hard for me to divorce the concepts, and I am biased, and I am trying to see your way, but again, I only see a lot of what you are saying as justification for not using the transformation.

And yes, ricdaw had a great post and I acknowledged that I agreed with him except elucidating one small point about the Transformation being in tandem with the Great Way.

[Jade]

I also get the point about not seeing the Law of One as a Bible, but that's why you don't look at the forest for the trees: You don't get fixed on a single word like "courting" and decide it's the one part of the Ra material you disagree with. To me, that seems silly. Not to mention, I did post this in the archetypes forum which is a subforum of the "Strictly Law of One" forum. So yes, in this context, I am being a bit rigid, but it's again because I'm trying to understand the schematics of the wheel that Ra has given us before I go and reinvent it.

[Minyatur]

I don't believe it's that I have a problem seeing love and not romanticizing the concept, it's that both of you seem to have a problem with unromanticizing the word courting, which is what I've been making attempts to do by discussing it in context between entities that are not sexualized. Yes, we are seeking the "Greater love" but AGAIN this is NOT what the Transformation of the Mind is about. The myriad of triangles in the card represent how the paths split, how polarity splits, how you can be 99+% STO OR 99+% STS. This only has meaning within this system of third density, but the spectrum is meant to be used because that is how electrical charges work: The stronger the polarity, the stronger the charge, the more power one has. It's possible that in your argument you are presenting that you do not desire this "power of polarity" (or Ra calls it the "gift of polarity") because you do not desire to affect change on others. That's fine. But the archetypes are about developing polarity and integrating the mind/body/spirit complex to affect positive change.

Saying that you can have a positive interaction without calling it courting in no way denies polarity. I have spoke of polarity in most of my posts. I have spoke of having positive intent in many ways which I do not relate to courting, but which you seem to have deemed as invalid because of that.

The transformation here would be to accept to always question myself before any of my acts, because that would be showing respect toward that which I interact with and allow me to move where I am needed more than where I desire to go.

I disagree. My interpretation of Ra is that we are supposed to act first, then balance it later.

I am extremely unsure where the transformation of the mind fits into the process for you. To me acting brings reflection which brings oppourtinity for transformation because of the later balance.

While I did not deny what can be a transformation of the mind for you, you deny what can be one for me. This is something that came from.acting and as I said, I am still in the process of the experience and not yet at the transformation, which would mean to make this my default attitude of acting. You can call it courting, because it implies caring for other-selves and trying to sense what they truly need, if that makes it seem ok to be one when called that.

And you say you decide what is "good" and "bad" but from what point do we determine the relativity of good and bad? Ra uses the romantic angle because it's a subjective signpost: How would you treat the one you love the most? Again, this is still a personally subjective signpost, because some people would chop up and eat the ones they love the most. But if you loved someone and you were trying to court her SO YOU COULD chop her up and eat her, how would you treat her? That is the point of the exercise of the romantic angle.

I don't decide what is good or bad, I open myself to my high priestess to know what my inner feelings are. Because the unconscious mind sees much further and wider than the conscious one.

I didn't dismiss the romantic angle, I have been more baffled at how no other angle can seem to be considered as also valid. But to be fair I doubt my greatest of expression of being in love is the same as yours just as I doubt how I can desire to be treated by someome who loves me to be anything like what you desire yourself.

I could see you being called to go to McDonald, unlike what you said. Why? Because something that has been plundered of it's resources could help having love poured into it for example. Could need someone loving to tangle with it in this present moment and create a link with it for future moments also. Can need someone to internalize parts of it's traumas to be either worked upon consciously or unconsciously depending on the person. Not saying that you should make a habit of doing this, just that to be truly loving is being open to serve in whatever ways you can be called to serve. Of course if you are unable to feel love for some things that are, then you won't be called to serve them because it will be out of the reach of what you can provide as service.

See, to me, this is just justification to avoid the transformation. There is no secret that McDonald's cares more about profits than resources. I still love McDonald's and accept that there are those who use that system. However, knowing what I know, I am unable in good conscience to participate in that system to procure my food, especially when I have so many other choices of much more positive systems to choose to feed my energy into. This is how I see the transformation: What energies am I choosing to feed? Am I feeding the systems that support prostitution of resources, or am I feeding systems that court their resources and aren't just focused on money and profits, at least to the best of my ability to discern?

Here you completely dismissed the point of my example. I said an entity which has been plundered calls to you so that you can work with it. This can be a one case scenario that happens only once and I doubt the little money you'd give to the restaurant would have any meaning to it.

Like I said, if you are not open to offer service in any way that can be required, then you are avoiding yourself the transformation.

Sure, I might feel called to send love and light to McDonald's, but it's hard to fathom for me how buying a Big Mac would lead to any huge shift in polarization either way, really. But the Transformation is about letting go of the choices that hold you back, the ones that have no net value or even a slight net loss. I see your point but again, in the context of the transformation, it's justifying avoiding it. Of course the prostitute needs love too and healing, too. I'm just not giving her any of my money because I get her services elsewhere.

McDonald isn't the prostitute in what I said.

You seem to think that the transformation of the Mind is a one time happening process,

Would you point out where I implied this? I'm pretty sure my main point in one of my last posts to Night Owl is that the Transformation of the Mind is basically always available to be utilized, all the time. Life on planet Earth is all about procuring and using resources to sustain our own life, and we are inherently selfish about how we use them because we have been taught to be very concerned about survival.

Well I gave a scenario that works for me and you disagreed with it because it was not courting-centered and not the manner in which you found to love others.

[Jade]

Okay, but we're not talking about courting a plundered entity, we're talking about engaging in the plundering. Are you talking about going to McDonald's and spending my money there to infuse it with love? Because I believe I can infuse love from a distance and spend my money elsewhere. Are you saying that an entity who works at McDonald's who may have been plundered may need comfort? Yes, but that doesn't mean continuing to plunder them by going to McDonald's. If you are not talking about the act of actually engaging in commerce at McDonald's, we are speaking of two different analogies and I missed your point entirely.

You said that the transformation of the mind was about "anything". Ra says it's about something very specifically. It's about abandoning something, not just going back and forth and transforming your mind over and over. It's about following a path. There is "devotion" implied for a reason.

[Minyatur]

Minyatur, I don't understand the motivation behind your post about what love is, with all the Quo etc. excerpts, when the archetype is about the distinction between love of self and love of others. It's like veering of into a discussion about what exactly direction is, when the topic under discussion is about the choice between East and West... of course love of self destroys.

Just that Love is much more abstract than what is expressed in this thread.

Love of self is not the only form of love that destroys. The earth/sun and other astral bodies went beyond our petty paradox of self love and love for others and still can offer both creation and destruction.

My example about the earth was this, a form of love that transcend all of our owns can offer the catalyst of earthquakes and such because it is what other-selves require for their experience. It does so selflessly and not our of love of self.

This entire Octave is an exploration of the Thought of Love, I really don't get why it seems that this abstract thought would not be known and felt differently by each infinite being that moves through an exploration of it.

[Night Owl]

What I said earlier is that I prefer to stay alone for now in an attempt to evolve and change. That doesn't mean I have never loved. I did have many occurences where I have been courted and it has bogged me down but I was not in love in those cases. When I did fall in love there was actually close to no courting involved and it was much more intense than I can still describe or understand to this day.

I try to keep my answers related to what you answer to me but maybe the fact we both get involved can mess it up a bit.

I guess what I am trying to do is communicate that it is possible to still be in accordance with Ra and not take so literally. But I guess even if you agree it doesn't have to be so literal, you seem to resonante with the concept literally and use it literally and that is where the line is hard to draw. You can find arguments where you can use courting differently but if you use it literally in real time it will be hard for you to really go deep into unknown territory in the opposite direction. I understand that. I just like going deep into the unknown.

One thing I said was maybe burried within too much text though. Do you see what I meant when I said that Ra didn't use the analogy at first when speaking of the archetype but used it later when asked to go deeper? What do you think is the reason the analogy was not part of the inital statement? How do you understand Ra's process of going deeper into descriptions?

The way I see it, Ra always seem to state things as less distorted as possible at first, and then seeks a way to elaborate deeper into distortions doing his best not to distort it further than we can take. And sometimes it goes borderline not because Ra is essentially distorted but more because Ra has to work with distortions as his tools of communication. At this point it becomes our job to elaborate ourselves so we can find the less distorted common ground possible together.

[Jade]

Minyatur, I don't understand the motivation behind your post about what love is, with all the Quo etc. excerpts, when the archetype is about the distinction between love of self and love of others. It's like veering of into a discussion about what exactly direction is, when the topic under discussion is about the choice between East and West... of course love of self destroys.

Just that Love is much more abstract than what is expressed in this thread.

Love of self is not the only form of love that destroys. The earth/sun and other astral bodies went beyond our petty paradox of self love and love for others and still can offer both creation and destruction.

My example about the earth was this, a form of love that transcend all of our owns can offer the catalyst of earthquakes and such because it is what other-selves require for their experience. It does so selflessly and not our of love of self.

This entire Octave is an exploration of the Thought of Love, I really don't get why it seems that this abstract thought would not be known and felt differently by each infinite being that moves through an exploration of it.

I do not disagree with you about any of these things. The only thing I disagree about is that this has much relevance at all to the concept of green-ray, service-to-others love that we are trying to describe in the concept related to the Transformation of the Mind. There's a reason why we are using these concepts. You wouldn't want, say, your pet to be destroyed in an earthquake. Of course you will want it to experience what it desires but you will still mourn its loss and wish for its return at some point, because you are veiled and removed from it. And you wouldn't be the earthquake who destroyed him, would you, if there were plenty of other earthquakes to be had to cause the destruction that was needed? I see your point, but we are taking about engaging in positive service to others, which has specific gestalts for a reason. Sure, we can justify going out and performing murders because "that's the catalyst someone needs" and holding back food from the hungry because "that's the catalyst someone needs", but that's not the catalyst I want to be, and that's not the catalyst implied when Ra says courting and service-to-others.

[Minyatur]

Okay, but we're not talking about courting a plundered entity, we're talking about engaging in the plundering. Are you talking about going to McDonald's and spending my money there to infuse it with love? Because I believe I can infuse love from a distance and spend my money elsewhere. Are you saying that an entity who works at McDonald's who may have been plundered may need comfort? Yes, but that doesn't mean continuing to plunder them by going to McDonald's. If you are not talking about the act of actually engaging in commerce at McDonald's, we are speaking of two different analogies and I missed your point entirely.

Once again you miss the entire point of my example.

It is not about McDonald's, it is about a single other-self being that calls upon you and which reaches you in it's call because you resonate with it. It tries to draw you to itself, and where it is in a freaking McDonald's. A single piece of meat that came from an animal to which you could provide a much greater service toward than what little money you give to McDonald's in the process would do. It is not even about eating yourself, just that by being open to any manner of service would allow you to serve in new ways by trusting your unconscious and being guided with it. You said you would go out in the rain if asked to, but there seems to be many things you would feel unwilling to do even if you felt that it is the "right" or "good" choice based upon your unconscious awareness and feelings. Of course, if you'd be unable in any way to feel love while doing so, then you will never be called to serve in this way.

Transformation of the mind is about letting go of things, you said so yourself.

[Minyatur]

Minyatur, I don't understand the motivation behind your post about what love is, with all the Quo etc. excerpts, when the archetype is about the distinction between love of self and love of others. It's like veering of into a discussion about what exactly direction is, when the topic under discussion is about the choice between East and West... of course love of self destroys.

Just that Love is much more abstract than what is expressed in this thread.

Love of self is not the only form of love that destroys. The earth/sun and other astral bodies went beyond our petty paradox of self love and love for others and still can offer both creation and destruction.

My example about the earth was this, a form of love that transcend all of our owns can offer the catalyst of earthquakes and such because it is what other-selves require for their experience. It does so selflessly and not our of love of self.

This entire Octave is an exploration of the Thought of Love, I really don't get why it seems that this abstract thought would not be known and felt differently by each infinite being that moves through an exploration of it.

I do not disagree with you about any of these things. The only thing I disagree about is that this has much relevance at all to the concept of green-ray, service-to-others love that we are trying to describe in the concept related to the Transformation of the Mind. There's a reason why we are using these concepts. You wouldn't want, say, your pet to be destroyed in an earthquake. Of course you will want it to experience what it desires but you will still mourn its loss and wish for its return at some point, because you are veiled and removed from it. And you wouldn't be the earthquake who destroyed him, would you, if there were plenty of other earthquakes to be had to cause the destruction that was needed? I see your point, but we are taking about engaging in positive service to others, which has specific gestalts for a reason. Sure, we can justify going out and performing murders because "that's the catalyst someone needs" and holding back food from the hungry because "that's the catalyst someone needs", but that's not the catalyst I want to be, and that's not the catalyst implied when Ra says courting and service-to-others.

I haven't spoke of justifying going to murder, but yeah if someone is within a configuration that requires him to do so, then yes you should find love in what that other-self is moving through although it is not your own distortions. And at some point that person will need to transmute all of this seemingly darkness into what it truly always was, light and love.

I spoke many times that we make polarized choice and that this is the center of the transformation of the mind. Just that what will be STO for you is not what will be STO for another, polarity is within intent and how we each distort our experiences within ourselves is extremely unique to each. You can do things that are polarizing to yourself, yet that if I would imitate you would be depolarizing to myself. Just as the other way around, just as this being the case with other people to which it'd be polarizing for both of us and not to another, just as another and not both to us, etc.

[Jade]

One thing I said was maybe burried within too much text though. Do you see what I meant when I said that Ra didn't use the analogy at first when speaking of the archetype but used it later when asked to go deeper? What do you think is the reason the analogy was not part of the inital statement? How do you understand Ra's process of going deeper into descriptions?

The way I see it, Ra always seem to state things as less distorted as possible at first, and then seeks a way to elaborate deeper into distortions doing his best not to distort it further than we can take. And sometimes it goes borderline not because Ra is essentially distorted but more because Ra has to work with distortions as his tools of communication. At this point it becomes our job to elaborate ourselves so we can find the less distorted common ground possible together.

I guess I see the way that Ra presented the archetypes was that he didn't want to give too much away to Don before Don reflected upon them himself a little bit. Don's initial questions into each archetypes always elicited shallow answers. It was awhile before Don and the gang actually sat down and discussed the symbols as Ra encouraged them to do as the first step. Once they had some of their own thoughts, Ra was happy to clear up their misconceptions and give them more riddles. But we have so many archetypes that Ra said next to nothing about that we still have to learn to work with in the dark, groping in the moonlight, so I will take any clarity Ra offers and run with it, really, especially when it works really well for me.

I want to add that I'm always talking about achieving the deep love that you felt in the relationship that required no courting. I think that's what Ra refers to as previously mated pairs piercing the blue-ray, because they have already laid down the work of "courtship" in previous lifetimes. Though, when two entities join up permanently there is a type of courtship dance involved to maintain the balance in the relationship. It's just that, through the veil, most people -don't- see the love in the moment. It's purposeful that we have to constantly refocus our gaze to redirect it towards love. That's why I think it's valuable to have a reference point of a highly loved other-self of whatever type you want. I can substitute pet or mom or anything in there that you'd like to deromanticize it.

[Night Owl]

I think the reason Ra gives so few details at first is because without distortions, everything is already in the initial statement. Different people would probably diversify the expension of the concept but remaining in allignement with the first statement is how the relativity of different versions keep them together.

I think the courting that you imply in the case I've spoken is some kind of astral plane mating. In which case I could agree there is some courting involved but that is inherently taking it to the romantic side of it which I was trying to avoid at first. But I understand you may have needed me to make it clear I have already been in love while still having this perspective to understand where I come from.

[Minyatur]

Transformation of the Mind as I understand it :

Integrating a transformation of the mind, is allowing a new mental configuration to take place. This relates to something/anything in regards to how self interacts with itself and others.

This is done through the previous archetypes of the Mind where the mental configuration fluctuates about it's previous configuration, until it leads all the way up to the transformation where a choice betwixt the light and dark is made within the Mind and integrated as the new configuration. In short, the pathways of the mind are rebuilt.

Meditation has this purpose a lot, some speak of reaching a Gnosis state of mind where you can rebuild your pattern of thoughts by acknowleding them and making choices upon how you desire them. Psychedelic drugs do really help this process a lot, as they put deep into the state of Gnosis and this is why it is so much easier to let go of habits through using them. Example : Steve did shrooms and lost all desire of smoking cigarettes. Steve on the deeper state of mind made the choice that he desires to pay respect to his body and himself.

I see how this describes the mechanics of how the archetype works, but how does this apply anything Ra said about the archetype after the "betwixt the light and dark" choice? It isn't just about creating new pathways in the mind about "anything", it's about abandoning one type of use of the pathways, deliberately. It's about "going forth to court" the resources of others. Ra chose those words for a reason, IMO.

Ra: In this image of Transformation of Mind, then, each of the females points the way it would go, but is not able to move, nor are the two female entities striving to do so. They are at rest. The conscious entity holds both and will turn itself one way or the other or, potentially, backwards and forwards, rocking first one way then the other and not achieving the transformation. In order for the Transformation of Mind to occur, one principle governing the use of the deep mind must be abandoned.


It is to be noted that the triangular shape formed by the shoulders and crossed elbows of consciousness is a shape to be associated with transformation. Indeed, you may see this shape echoed twice more in the image, each echo having its own riches to add to the impact of this complex of concepts.

Each pattern of thought has a polarized duality, so the image is put upon the duality to offer a useful representation of this duality. The point is still just the duality of thoughts.

I agree Ra chose those words for a reason, it is how love is known both to them and their wanderers, so makes sense this is what they would share in a text full of keys for their wanderers to awake. He could try to give an image that would resonate with other types of entities instead, with a different background of experience of this one same original thought, but maybe it'd make the words less useful for most of those that will read them.

[Jade]

Okay, but we're not talking about courting a plundered entity, we're talking about engaging in the plundering. Are you talking about going to McDonald's and spending my money there to infuse it with love? Because I believe I can infuse love from a distance and spend my money elsewhere. Are you saying that an entity who works at McDonald's who may have been plundered may need comfort? Yes, but that doesn't mean continuing to plunder them by going to McDonald's. If you are not talking about the act of actually engaging in commerce at McDonald's, we are speaking of two different analogies and I missed your point entirely.

Once again you miss the entire point of my example.

It is not about McDonald's, it is about a single other-self being that calls upon you and which reaches you in it's call because you resonate with it. It tries to draw you to itself, and where it is in a freaking McDonald's. A single piece of meat that came from an animal to which you could provide a much greater service toward than what little money you give to McDonald's in the process would do. It is not even about eating yourself, just that by being open to any manner of service would allow you to serve in new ways by trusting your unconscious and being guided with it. You said you would go out in the rain if asked to, but there seems to be many things you would feel unwilling to do even if you felt that it is the "right" or "good" choice based upon your unconscious awareness and feelings. Of course, if you'd be unable in any way to feel love while doing so, then you will never be called to serve in this way.

Transformation of the mind is about letting go of things, you said so yourself.

Okay... so I'm not using the Transformation of the Mind because I refuse to go eat a burger at McDonald's? Is that your logical conclusion with this analogy?

This experience (3rd density) is not about blindly trusting our subconscious. It's about learning how to use the resources of our subconscious so that our intuition doesn't tell us the wrong thing, like somehow warp, justify, and convolute eating a burger at McDonald's as an action of compassionate service-to-others. My logic, intuition, and experience informs me that I have much better ways to deal with the call of service I feel towards that entity - i.e. to stop eating it and not to continue participating in a system that tortures it. Again, it's not about blindly following, but slowly getting to know and understand what your High priestess (and others) want/feel. If my High Priestess is telling me to do something that I feel infringes upon the free will of another, I have a choice to not do that. The archetypes are about mind/body integration, not just dominance of the mind over matter.

I was not attempting to make this about meat by any means, and this is just one way I use the transformation of the mind, by letting go of what I perceive as prostituted resources. Some people stop using palm oil because it destroys the rainforest. Many people choose to eat relatively humanely raised meat instead of mass produced antibiotic filled junk. That's why I specifically used the example of McDonald's, because you would be very hard pressed to find anything they do in the production of food as being on the spectrum of ethical.  But shoot, it's hardly even real meat, so if you felt called to serve a McDonald's burger patty, you're likely being called to the soybean filler. (which is just as poorly treated!)

[Jade]

I think the reason Ra gives so few details at first is because without distortions, everything is already in the initial statement. Different people would probably diversify the expension of the concept but remaining in allignement with the first statement is how the relativity of different versions keep them together.

I think the courting that you imply in the case I've spoken is some kind of astral plane mating. In which case I could agree there is some courting involved but that is inherently taking it to the romantic side of it which I was trying to avoid at first. But I understand you may have needed me to make it clear I have already been in love while still having this perspective to understand where I come from.

I guess, Ra gave the image to the Egyptians of the male holding the hands of two females, one nude, the other more clothed and pointing towards the right. He is tangled until he releases the hands of one of them. He must let something go, and he must turn his back upon it and walk away from it, therefore making a gesture to show his intent to follow the woman who is in the guise of a bride. He didn't first and only give Don the one statement, he first gave him the image to look at. So, the distortions run deep in the archetypes I suppose. Maybe you should take it up with the Logos!

And this is what I was referring to regarding the relationship you might have had with the other entity. I'm pretty sure Ra was talking about 3rd density incarnate entities:

84.20 Questioner: Then, with respect to the green, blue, and indigo transfers of energy: How would the mechanism for these transfers differ in making them possible or setting the groundwork for them than the orange ray? I know this is very difficult to ask and I may not be making any sense, but what I am trying to do is get to an understanding of the foundation for transfers in each of the rays and the preparations for the transfers, you might say, or the fundamental requirements and biases and potentials for these transfers. Could you expand on that for me please? I am sorry for the poor question.


Ra: I am Ra. We would take a moment to state in reply to a previous comment that we shall answer each query whether or not it has been previously covered for not to do so would be to baffle the flow of quite another transfer of energy.

To respond to your query we firstly wish to agree with your supposition that the subject you now query upon is a large one, for in it lies an entire system of opening the gateway to intelligent infinity. You may see that some information is necessarily shrouded in mystery by our desire to preserve the free will of the adept. The great key to blue, indigo, and finally, that great capital of the column of sexual energy transfer, violet energy transfers, is the metaphysical bond or distortion which has the name among your peoples of unconditional love. In the blue-ray energy transfer the quality of this love is refined in the fire of honest communication and clarity; this, shall we say, normally, meaning in general, takes a substantial portion of your space/time to accomplish although there are instances of matings so well refined in previous incarnations and so well remembered that the blue ray may be penetrated at once. This energy transfer is of great benefit to the seeker in that all communication from this seeker is, thereby, refined and the eyes of honesty and clarity look upon a new world. Such is the nature of blue-ray energy and such is one mechanism of potentiating and crystallizing it.

As we approach indigo-ray transfer we find ourselves in a shadowland where we cannot give you information straight out or plain, for this is seen by us to be an infringement. We cannot speak at all of violet-ray transfer as we do not, again, desire to break the Law of Confusion.

We may say that these jewels, though dearly bought, are beyond price for the seeker and might suggest that just as each awareness is arrived at through a process of analysis, synthesis, and inspiration, so should the seeker approach its mate and evaluate each experience, seeking the jewel.

But of course, I don't know, just what I was referring to. I feel it accurately describes a few of my experiences that are somewhat unexplainable.

For what it's worth I think that the last statement is Ra's attempt at an unromanticized definition of courting.

[Minyatur]

Okay, but we're not talking about courting a plundered entity, we're talking about engaging in the plundering. Are you talking about going to McDonald's and spending my money there to infuse it with love? Because I believe I can infuse love from a distance and spend my money elsewhere. Are you saying that an entity who works at McDonald's who may have been plundered may need comfort? Yes, but that doesn't mean continuing to plunder them by going to McDonald's. If you are not talking about the act of actually engaging in commerce at McDonald's, we are speaking of two different analogies and I missed your point entirely.

Once again you miss the entire point of my example.

It is not about McDonald's, it is about a single other-self being that calls upon you and which reaches you in it's call because you resonate with it. It tries to draw you to itself, and where it is in a freaking McDonald's. A single piece of meat that came from an animal to which you could provide a much greater service toward than what little money you give to McDonald's in the process would do. It is not even about eating yourself, just that by being open to any manner of service would allow you to serve in new ways by trusting your unconscious and being guided with it. You said you would go out in the rain if asked to, but there seems to be many things you would feel unwilling to do even if you felt that it is the "right" or "good" choice based upon your unconscious awareness and feelings. Of course, if you'd be unable in any way to feel love while doing so, then you will never be called to serve in this way.

Transformation of the mind is about letting go of things, you said so yourself.

Okay... so I'm not using the Transformation of the Mind because I refuse to go eat a burger at McDonald's? Is that your logical conclusion with this analogy?

No in this context you would not make use of the Transformation of the Mind because you are not willing to open yourself to your High Priestess beyond going out dancing in the rain (upon which example you said you are not there to discuss what you are told).

From the quotes of Love I have shared, you would rather dwell upon "human" services than open yourself to serve in new ways which you are not yet consonant with.

This experience (3rd density) is not about blindly trusting our subconscious. It's about learning how to use the resources of our subconscious so that our intuition doesn't tell us the wrong thing, like somehow warp, justify, and convolute eating a burger at McDonald's as an action of compassionate service-to-others. My logic, intuition, and experience informs me that I have much better ways to deal with the call of service I feel towards that entity - i.e. to stop eating it and not to continue participating in a system that tortures it. Again, it's not about blindly following, but slowly getting to know and understand what your High priestess (and others) want/feel. If my High Priestess is telling me to do something that I feel infringes upon the free will of another, I have a choice to not do that. The archetypes are about mind/body integration, not just dominance of the mind over matter.

In this case you already do not partake in this system, but that system still is happening. In my example I gave said that this would only happen once, so you would not really contribute to the system, unless you truly believe a few dollars would actually make fluctuate something in it. You could be called to offer your love once for a single being that requires it, needs what only you would be able to provide it with, that calls upon you while you do hear it.

Consciously you can't rationalize why it can be good, but your High Priestess can very well know that your small contribution will not encourage the already happening plundering nor create fluctuation within it. That you would be draw toward entangling with something that calls to you, requires your help, your love because it needs it. And at this point, within these circumstances, the only thing that could prevent you from actually providing this service is you inability to love something that is.

I was not attempting to make this about meat by any means, and this is just one way I use the transformation of the mind, by letting go of what I perceive as prostituted resources. Some people stop using palm oil because it destroys the rainforest. Many people choose to eat relatively humanely raised meat instead of mass produced antibiotic filled junk. That's why I specifically used the example of McDonald's, because you would be very hard pressed to find anything they do in the production of food as being on the spectrum of ethical.  But shoot, it's hardly even real meat, so if you felt called to serve a McDonald's burger patty, you're likely being called to the soybean filler. (which is just as poorly treated!)

It's not about meat in my case either. Just that your inability to go into a McDonald's only one single time in your life and eat meat only on that very occasion, can very well also prevent you from offering a service of a positive nature that time. It is really not understandable to you in any way, that the meat of a single animal that has been killed and experienced trauma, could call upon you to receive the kind of love that you can have to offer to it? Given of course, that you would actually be able to feel love for this form of the Creator once it is in front of you.

I don't dismiss what you said either. There's many many many many many choices about many many many many things. But letting go means letting go of the way it satisfies yourself to serve, because that can allow a greater Love to be known to you and move through you. This is true for both you and me, I don't see myself as above it and I think this journey across love is a very long one with infinite steps through many-ness.

[Jade]

Lol, "human". Okay, robot? Alien? What would you rather be? Sorry for injecting this place with my puny thoughts of idealized love!

I believe I incarnated here, as this typist-waitress-video game player-pot head to mingle with others and be around for them so that I can occassionally take care of little needs for them and smile with them so that they are able to go about their day with less worries and more opportunities to possibly find a better reconfiguration of self that allows them to maybe, possibly, seek the Creator themselves. Because, the Great Way of the Body is the Alchemist - we are incarnated here, in this athanor, to refine gold from the extreme catalyst. The Fool is a "human". We Wandered here to help with this difficult harvest, to heal all the destructive energies of Mars and Maldek, so that Gaia doesn't suffer the same fate, so that entities ARE able to continue their experience as they please without disintegration by nuclear blast, which is the lesson this planet's collective is trying to heal/learn.

Eating a single burger at McDonald's would very likely make me physically ill, is what my intuition tells me. So, yeah, I won't martyr myself when they are plenty of people willing to look at a McDonald's hamburger with unadulterated love. I still am able to see these entities with love for the Creator, of course, I just don't feel called to consume them. You're right, I won't use the transformation of the mind in that way. It goes back to trying to protect the planet from destruction being part of the collective healing.

Dancing in the rain doesn't infringe on any other entities, that's why I said I wouldn't argue with it. I believe eating meat does. Of course, not in the grand scheme of "everything experiences what it desires" but within the context of the transformation of the mind when I am told to go forth and court something like a maiden, to me, that means to abandon any acts that I would not do to something I want to love and have around for as long as possible. I want to kiss and snuggle with my maiden, not cook and eat her (I guess I did unconsciously bring in that analogy eh?) - Ra says "both maidens await the reaching", which means both maidens will call to you, including the one who wants to be eaten/plundered/disrespected/whatever. The conscious mind holds both hands tightly.

Ra: I am Ra. We shall. The concept of the pull towards mental polarity may well be examined in the light of what the student has already accreted concerning the nature of the conscious, exemplified by the male, and the unconscious, exemplified by the female. Indeed, both the prostituted and the virginal of deep mind invite and await the reaching.

[YinYang]

Just that Love is much more abstract than what is expressed in this thread.

Love of self is not the only form of love that destroys. The earth/sun and other astral bodies went beyond our petty paradox of self love and love for others and still can offer both creation and destruction.

My example about the earth was this, a form of love that transcend all of our owns can offer the catalyst of earthquakes and such because it is what other-selves require for their experience. It does so selflessly and not our of love of self.

That's the learning of 4th density and beyond, the density of love and understanding, but for the time being we have to work with an "understanding" of love that is more or less universally understood by us all here in 3rd density, at our present nexus of evolution. The tarot is an aid for 3rd density advancement, so I feel it's counter-productive to bring a love or level of evolution that is beyond polarity and so far ahead of our current level of understanding into a discussion about a 3rd density teaching aid.

This entire Octave is an exploration of the Thought of Love, I really don't get why it seems that this abstract thought would not be known and felt differently by each infinite being that moves through an exploration of it.

I completely agree with you, but as long as we're in 3rd density, romantic love is universally understood by all, which makes the analogy a helpful one in terms of how we approach things.

I don't decide what is good or bad, I open myself to my high priestess to know what my inner feelings are. Because the unconscious mind sees much further and wider than the conscious one.

I'm only asking because I'm curious about this statement, because you are basically implying that you readily have access to you unconscious mind, which would imply that you are not veiled. Am I understanding you correctly?

[Night Owl]

I guess everything being relative you could also look at the image seeing both female pulling the male's hands towards them rather than the male holding them himself. It would make more sense to me either that he chooses to let one go in the process. I can't picture the unconscious mind as being two rather than one. That's why I felt ricdaw's analogy to be perfectly fitting. When he closes his eyes, this is where he reaches for his true intuition.

[Jade]

Either way doesn't matter too much, but regardless, there are two maidens. You have to find some way to divorce them to utilize the transformation, that has been my point this whole time. And Ra says they are not moving, they are awaiting the reaching because they are the female principle.

Ra: In this image of Transformation of Mind, then, each of the females points the way it would go, but is not able to move, nor are the two female entities striving to do so. They are at rest. The conscious entity holds both and will turn itself one way or the other or, potentially, backwards and forwards, rocking first one way then the other and not achieving the transformation. In order for the Transformation of Mind to occur, one principle governing the use of the deep mind must be abandoned.

[Minyatur]

Just that Love is much more abstract than what is expressed in this thread.

Love of self is not the only form of love that destroys. The earth/sun and other astral bodies went beyond our petty paradox of self love and love for others and still can offer both creation and destruction.

My example about the earth was this, a form of love that transcend all of our owns can offer the catalyst of earthquakes and such because it is what other-selves require for their experience. It does so selflessly and not our of love of self.

That's the learning of 4th density and beyond, the density of love and understanding, but for the time being we have to work with an "understanding" of love that is more or less universally understood by us all here in 3rd density, at our present nexus of evolution. The tarot is an aid for 3rd density advancement, so I feel it's counter-productive to bring a love or level of evolution that is beyond polarity and so far ahead of our current level of understanding into a discussion about a 3rd density teaching aid.

There is many-ness of distorting love into something more complex in 3D too. So no two person will experience the exact same opening of the heart.

One can still ponder why we are given these quotes here in 3D, if they are unhelpful. To me it is so that we can open ourselves to a greater awareness of love and unveil ourselves.

This entire Octave is an exploration of the Thought of Love, I really don't get why it seems that this abstract thought would not be known and felt differently by each infinite being that moves through an exploration of it.

I completely agree with you, but as long as we're in 3rd density, romantic love is universally understood by all, which makes the analogy a helpful one in terms of how we approach things.

Well universally, I think there's many couples that don't dwell in a romantic focus in their way to love each other. There are myriads of types of harmony that can be found between two persons.

I don't decide what is good or bad, I open myself to my high priestess to know what my inner feelings are. Because the unconscious mind sees much further and wider than the conscious one.

I'm only asking because I'm curious about this statement, because you are basically implying that you readily have access to you unconscious mind, which would imply that you are not veiled. Am I understanding you correctly?

There is the process of becoming in alignment with your unveiled self. Ra gives a lot of information about unveiling and it being possible, it does not happen at once but requires will and seeking to happen at all. In my case it is a battle between resistance toward it and desire to do it, quite a fun experience. So I guess I am unveiling more and more of myself.

[Night Owl]

Well I think it matters because if you see the male as holding their hands you see the females as being the unconscious the male must follow. On the other hand if the females are pulling him towards them, they do not represent his unconscious, they represent a projection of the choice that the male is doing inward with eyes closed. One version sees the maiden as the mind, the other sees the maiden as a projection of polarity. One being two the other being one with a polarizing choice to make.

I also undertsand what you say I'm merely noticing how it also seems more fitting with my experience of courting that the female tries to influence the unconscious of the male into her direction rather than the male actually courting one and plundering one, unless it's a really bad movie. And of course they would not do so actively, but passively with unconscious thoughts.

They are just thoughts I don't expect we come to a right/wrong conclusion, its just an observation on reality that surrounds me.

[Jade]

Fair enough, but the "unconscious of the male" is represented by the female, in the analogy, the male represents the conscious mind making a decision. The conscious mind says, "I'm going to treat my unconscious this way", it's not about the conscious mind closing his eyes and following whichever female tempts him on a whim, it's about closing your eyes and following the female of your choice and abandoning the other, because The Fool is actually "The Choice".

It is really subtle and difficult to discern the difference. But you have to remember, the prostitute does indeed want to be plundered. There is no rape involved, it's just a less harmonious energy exchange facilitated by the confusion caused by veiling.

[YinYang]

I have now gone back into the thread to see what has been said about the closed eyes.

That male figure has closed eyes. In a row of “mind” cards, where even the Unconscious has open eyes (albeit veiled), this is a telling clue to me. How does mind/consciousness NOT be aware (see)?

I would expect the male figure to have open eyes, if he is making a choice between the two females. Open eyes being consciously looking at and evaluating the two possibilities.

Well, we have this from elsewhere in the Ra material:

Ra: The majority of third-density beings is far along the chosen path before realization of that path is conscious.

[YinYang]

Why do the images in the beginning of book 4 differ from the ones at the back? There are big differences.

[Jade]

Why do the images in the beginning of book 4 differ from the ones at the back? There are big differences.

I've actually never seen the ones at the beginning/end of the book. It appears in the intro they say that the cards at the beginning of the book are their best attempt to recreate the cards for publication as they were out of print. So, the gang redrew them.

However, at the end of the PDF the notes say that it was this deck that Don used originally for questioning. http://green-door.narod.ru/zaintarot.html I think it's because it was drawn very precisely to what was drawn on the pyramids (95%+) The different ones at the end seem to be a combination of some of the prints of the Zain deck, and some of the redraws of their initial drawings, replacing the wands with spheres and removing the stars and other suggestions Ra made to make them more accurate.

[YinYang]

Aaah, okay!

The one in the beginning looks like this:



And the one at the end like this:



There is an explanation here under "Tarot Images".

[YinYang]

Well universally, I think there's many couples that don't dwell in a romantic focus in their way to love each other.

No, not when they're young lovers who are in love... This card is about temptation and desire, and sexual temptation and desire are two of the strongest forces in the human condition, so young lovers is a perfect symbolic representation of this concept, with the scantily dressed one on his left, making the left hand path seem more desirable superficially. Instant gratification (shallow) vs delayed gratification (deep).

You seem determined to make your personal unfavourable view of romantic love and its elements of passion universally applicable, but I suspect you might have better luck building a snowman in hell. I have to admit this thread has been frustrating to follow sometimes, because I feel a very simple, universally understood analogy that anyone can easily identify with and apply in their understanding of this archetype, has been turned into a whirlpool of confusion.

Courting the positive maiden entails the heart, not the head, which also makes the lovers well suited to this analogy. This love doesn't make a great deal of sense, it's beyond comprehension, you just crave their nearness, and want to share everything with them, and am ever curious about their views and just desire their well being and happiness. It's a light-hearted, non serious, mutually joyful and playful communion.

[Jade]

I think one thing it might come down to is that a lot of people like to use the Law of One as a hedonistic philosophy ("experience all things desired"), which is obviously fine, but hedonism is not the end goal of the Law of One but merely a step along the way. We are supposed to "experience all things desired until they fall away", and, if we are consciously working with catalyst, we can peel away the layers of the onion ourselves that we no longer want at a more rapid pace, (while, of course, integrating more of all that is within us, which is the paradox - how do we choose to use our will?) - which is what I feel is the point of learning the archetype system. The Law of One isn't about zen nihilism either, but what Ra teaches is a specific lesson in how to integrate the mind/body/spirit complex into an STO configuration with increasing polarity. We incarnated in third density to experience polarity, to integrate the mind/BODY/spirit because it's a delicate game. Ra gave us a pretty detailed, yet cryptic, rulebook.

It's fine to say "but that's not how I use the transformation of the mind!" But, from my experience of using the transformation of the mind per Ra's instructions, it seems most of the explanations to "use the transformation in your own way" is just justification for ignoring any complex moral/ethical implications that the card implies. Yes, experience all things desired. Yes, there are no mistakes. However, there is a specific way to articulate our experience as an "honestation to the Creator" as Ra calls it, and that is understanding and using the archetypes, and singing the song of Creation along with the Logos. Of course, we all have free will to do as we please, but you can't use the right-hand Transformation of the Mind AND be hedonistic. They are incongruent. Hedonism is the path of viewing our resources as there to be plundered for our pleasure.

I think this conversation is important, because I think the Lovers card has a lot of similar themes to the Experience of the Spirit ("groping in the moonlight" - ah look, another sexual allusion). The Lovers analogy is easy to understand at its roots, but once we involve the spirit complex into the integration, intentions and desires can get muddled. So I think we're all talking about the Lovers card but in the context of the conversation I think we're all dealing with Experience of the Spirit. We have to somehow deal with what we perceive as the "black dog".

There's a part of the card that we haven't discussed, but I think it could be taken into consideration. If we look at the imp at the top, there is a common misinterpretation even though Ra says exactly what he's there for: He's there to protect the left hand transformation of the mind. Why? Because if you aren't "courting" everything, i.e. empathizing with everything and having compassion for it, which is what green-ray is about, then you are protected from the negative emotional experiences of other selves. If you are properly courting the maiden, you are actually opening yourself up to the rawest of emotions. I made the comment before that you cry with your maiden, but the prostitute's tears mean naught. That's what the genie implies. When you truly see everything as a part of you, you feel its pain as if it were your own, and feel compelled to do something about it, just as you would your own pain. The left-hand transformation avoids this experience.

14.18 Questioner: Then for the last 2,300 years you have been actively working to create as large a harvest as possible at the end of the total 75,000-year cycle. Can you state with respect to the Law of One why you do this, just as a statement of your reasons for this?

Ra: I am Ra. I speak for the social memory complex termed Ra. We came among you to aid you. Our efforts in service were perverted. Our desire then is to eliminate as far as possible the distortions caused by those misreading our information and guidance. The general cause of service such as the Confederation offers is that of the primal distortion of the Law of One, which is service. The One Being of the creation is like unto a body, if you will accept this third-density analogy. Would we ignore a pain in the leg? A bruise upon the skin? A cut which is festering? No. There is no ignoring a call. We, the entities of sorrow, choose as our service the attempt to heal the sorrow which we are calling analogous to the pains of a physical body complex distortion.

Ra: All things are acceptable in the proper time for each entity, and in experiencing, in understanding, in accepting, in then sharing with other-selves, the appropriate description shall be moving away from distortions of one kind to distortions of another which may be more consonant with the Law of One.

[isis]

he said "No, I mostly tell my creative spark to bend over and give it to me."

when i tell my creative spark to bend over & give it to me it says nah maybe some other time