Free Will Infringement, what is it?

[Aion]

True although I would caveat that individuals whom have gone to the lengths to consciously deceive, have created and maintained such an organization, as well as developing such 'rituals' or demands they are well aware could result in the death of another person, are, in my opinion, definitely pushing some degree of adeptness in consciousness of the rather self-serving variety. Adepts aren't usually people in robes performing rituals under the moonlight (or midday sun for those sunny folk), they are people who have developed enough awareness of how to use their choices to the benefit or detriment of others that they are not acting 'unconsciously'.

That is VERY generous of you, I would say.  Someone else might chalk it up to stupid people doing stupid things.  But who's to say.....I suppose?

    

I actually have a certain dislike for calling people 'stupid' or 'idiot' or any other sort of attack upon intelligence, because it first of all is fallacious in light of the philosophy of evolution of consciousness to my eyes, and also because these phrases are both lazy and insulting. It is an essentially meaningless expression that can be interpreted in no way but a sense of superiority.

Second, those types of words and phrases have been used towards other humans especially to batter women, people with disabilities, neuro-atypical individuals, transgendered, different sexuality, etc, etc, etc and otherwise outcasts.

So, maybe I'm being generous, or maybe I just see them as human and not a reduction to abstraction. Who's to say?

[Sacred Fool]

I actually have a certain dislike for calling people 'stupid' or 'idiot' or any other sort of attack upon intelligence, because it first of all is fallacious in light of the philosophy of evolution of consciousness to my eyes, and also because these phrases are both lazy and insulting. It is an essentially meaningless expression that can be interpreted in no way but a sense of superiority.

Second, those types of words and phrases have been used towards other humans especially to batter women, people with disabilities, neuro-atypical individuals, transgendered, different sexuality, etc, etc, etc and otherwise outcasts.

So, maybe I'm being generous, or maybe I just see them as human and not a reduction to abstraction. Who's to say?  

Well, so far as free will goes (to try to stay on topic a little bit), I'd say you're perfectly within your rights to support people who do "foolish" things more than those who call them as they see them. 
   
For my part, well, I guess we're all trying to learn our lessons as best we can, given what we have to work with.  Needless to say, it's abundantly challenging for every one of us.

   

[Aion]

I actually have a certain dislike for calling people 'stupid' or 'idiot' or any other sort of attack upon intelligence, because it first of all is fallacious in light of the philosophy of evolution of consciousness to my eyes, and also because these phrases are both lazy and insulting. It is an essentially meaningless expression that can be interpreted in no way but a sense of superiority.

Second, those types of words and phrases have been used towards other humans especially to batter women, people with disabilities, neuro-atypical individuals, transgendered, different sexuality, etc, etc, etc and otherwise outcasts.

So, maybe I'm being generous, or maybe I just see them as human and not a reduction to abstraction. Who's to say?  

Well, so far as free will goes (to try to stay on topic a little bit), I'd say you're perfectly within your rights to support people who do "foolish" things more than those who call them as they see them. 
   
For my part, well, I guess we're all trying to learn our lessons as best we can, given what we have to work with.  Needless to say, it's abundantly challenging for every one of us.

   

Humans are absolutely silly and do all sorts of ridiculous things, don't get me wrong, and not sure where you've gotten that I've 'supported' anything, more just analyzing. My mind just doesn't work in a way that will reduce things to single word ultimatum identities because it doesn't make any sense to me.

It sort of ties in to free will for me, I do my best not to 'define' people or to make any decisions about other people's identity in any sort of concrete way. So I shy away from any sort of vague wording which does more to muddle than give any clarity in to the human experience. Meanwhile using way too many words to express the simplest of concepts. Naturally, I have things to balance too.

That said, I have no expectation on the minds of others and each is free to choose the words that they feel appropriately expresses themselves. Thus, I've given my preference, but you are free to do what you will with yours.

Assuredly, the "vivid" catalyst offered in this density is the soil we've all buried ourselves in. All the more golden those moments of grasping our own will with great freedom.

[jafar]

In absolute perspective, the 'free will' on the level of the 'parts' or 'fractals' do not exist.
Do not exist here in the manner that the 'free will' of the parts is in conflict with the 'free will' of the whole as such also in conflict of the 'free will' of the other parts.

And as one 'ascend', by 'ascension' here it means gained wider / zoomed out perspective.
The illusion of the free will of the part will gradually start to decay.

A boss who is angry at his employee, well actually both the boss and the employee does agree that both will have those experience. It just that they don't remember it or don't understand it when they 'perform' the act, as such will render the 'experience' to be 'not genuine'.

Once each part realize that both are the same person, and the 'act' is actually a monologue of the same person, the illusion of having the free will of choosing between 'be angry' or 'be not angry' from the boss perspective start to disappear. The boss want to have the experience of 'being angry' and the employee does want to have the experience of 'being angered-at'.

That's also why as one 'ascend', the difference between STS or STO will gradually be thinner and thinner.
Each conflict is an illusion, STS or STO is a temporal state.

Another personal example, although this might be more 'complicated'.
I used to have problem with Math on elementary school.
If I now go back in time and meet 6 years old jafar would I help him to scored A on every math test?
Which is an easy thing to do for me at my current state.

My answer will be absolutely no, and if I do that I will also infringed my own free will, which of course I don't want to and most importantly it will caused me to missed the lesson of 'overcoming my own problems by myself'.

The reason being that I now have understood that scoring A on elementary school math test is actually *NOT* the objective.
The 6 years old jafar need to have the experience of overcoming the problem, by himself, and that's actually a very valuable lesson for him. More valuable than scoring A on math test.

From the perspective of 6 yo jafar, such view is 'nonsense', the true objective is to scored A on math test!
He will do anything for that objective, including copying other people's work if he has to.
And I as jafar at current state understood that as well as such view is actually part of the lesson.
And I do know that 6 yo jafar will do exactly that as well.
There's no conflict here.. as I've understood why...

Mr Ra on many occasions seem to avoid giving out certain information or answer with the excuse of 'infringement of free will'.
Then I understood it in the same manner as current state jafar refused to give out the answer to the elementary school math test or homework to 6 yo jafar.

Of course Mr Ra also fully understand why the questioner is not satisfied with such answer as I also understand why 6 yo jafar is not satisfied with my refusal of giving out the answer. The only 'glimpse of the future' that I might give to 6 yo jafar will be 'you will eventually solve that problem by yourself' which of course doesn't ease the 'frustration' felt by 6 yo jafar.

[zedro]

You may very well be right about STS being more inclined to infringe on people's free will, but I don't think the act itself is polarizing towards the negative, which is why I brought up examples of Ra or other confederation types infringing on the free will of people here.

As for the police example, the clear difference there is intent. As you say he is acting on false pemise.

Most certainly intent is key, but so is action and consequence.

Intent: Direction of polarity
Action: degree of polarization
Consequence: karmic side effect

Free will and the interaction with such is very nuanced, and very contextual, which is why the discussion would differ between the levels of 'divine relationships'. Which is why I feel the subject would be segmented within the Ra teachings. There is alot of reading between the lines.

[Patrick]

Thank you Spaced. I like the example of parenting when discussing freewill.

I do believe being a parent involves abriging the freewill/freedom of the child quite a lot. This seems inevitable on Earth at the moment and the child accepted that his will would be affected like that before incarnation.

There are so many other examples in our society where we walk on each other's freewill. Just think how raising a child would look like if we were trying to do it without abriging their freewill so much.

Abrogation of free will is so ingrained in our world that we find it hard to imagine how children could be raised otherwise.

I made my peace with this. I have a son and I don't know how else to do it either. We have no one to teach us how to do it here on this planet.

In the end, I believe our children forgive us and so not much karma is involved and regarding polarity it's our intentions that are important, so it's all good there as well (at least for most parents).

[Minyatur]

We have independent will. Individualized creator has a path, no one is “free” though.

Research on this shows the subconscious makes decisions even though the conscious mind thinks it does.

It’s like input in, all collected data leads to choice A or B

Ra adding information not requested changes the subconscious awareness  therefore would change the data, and therefore the individuated consciousness’s path. Infringing on that free/independent will by altering their path with info not sought.

This is yet another reason forgiveness or judgment makes no sense.
Until a consiousness is given new data it can only do as it has been programmed via data.

To me that sounds like only recognizing humans as mind/body complexes rather than mind/body/spirit complexes. Also, it is to note that this is the density in which self-awareness grows and that this is veiled to an extent, so I don't think the power of individuated free will is at its strongest within our experience and instead develops through time. The dynamic that you speak of is because of the veil between the conscious and subconscious mind, which causes both of them to be largely unaware of the other in how we develop through them. Prior to the veil, I believe there was no such dynamics and the part of ourselves we consider conscious, and relate more strongly to, simply had more resources to itself that are now subconscious.

Free will is the most primal component of our experience from which everything stems. Then there are layers and layers of distortions that were generated by free will in weighting it down and constricting it into a more finite and complex experience. So to a large extent on the surface you may seem to merely be your environment, but more fundamentally beneath it all you are free will and the nature of it evolves through the densities.

The fallacy of forgiveness and judgment, which I agree with in terms of perceiving separation, is more rooted in that everything has the One as its source and so reflect what this One is. The circumstances are then holographic and the constant that is reflected is free will.

To go back to the thread, I do not believe it is possible in any way to infringe upon the first distortion of free will. Merely its extension generated by the Logos through the usage of the veil.

[MrWho]

https://www.lawofone.info/s/18#5

We have found it to be inappropriate in the extreme to encourage the overcoming of any desires, except to suggest the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane, as you call it, of those desires not consonant with the Law of One; this preserving the primal distortion of free will.

The infringement of others free will by other incarnated beings is VERY possible. It is simply letting your desire overcome their will.

Suggesting otherwise is a grave mistake in perception.

I'm not saying I want to but if I desired to hit you in the face with my fist for your words here. That would be an infringement of your free will consonant with the Law of One. (It would be better if I just imagined hitting you in the face)

To all readers, please do not overthink infringement of free will. It is simple.

Do all things desired, except if they interfere with the free will of an other-self.

[Diana]

If a mother tells their child to go to bed because it's their bedtime are they enforcing their will on the kid? Absolutely. Are they infringing on the child's free will? I don't think so.

I think there are degrees of that. In the past, and with indigenous peoples, children are/were let to be pretty free, with a "village" keeping watch, rather than the degree of protection parents must employ over children in a modern-day city/town situation.

This makes me think of schooling. I like the idea of Montessori schools, where children are allowed to do what they want to do, what attracts them, rather than teachers making them follow a syllabus or planned curriculum. 

Also, ideally, why shouldn't even a child sleep when it is tired, and eat when it is hungry? That would be most natural. But it just isn't practical for the parents or modern societal activities. A baby is different as it can't feed itself etc. 

No disrespect intended toward any parents.

 

[Diana]

73.12 ▶ Questioner: I would then assume that the many so-called evangelists which we have in our society at present, many have great desire and very great will, and possibly great polarity. It seems to me that in some cases that there is a lack of information or awareness that creates a less than effective working in the magical sense. Am I correct in this analysis?


Ra: I am Ra. You are partially correct. In examining the polarity of a service-to-others working the free will must be seen as paramount. Those entities of which you speak are attempting to generate positive changes in consciousness while abridging free will. This causes the blockage of the magical nature of the working except in those cases wherein an entity freely desires to accept the working of the evangelist, as you have called it.

I think Ra's answer makes it clear that it is possible to infringe upon free will here in this density.

[confusedseeker]

73.12 ▶ Questioner: I would then assume that the many so-called evangelists which we have in our society at present, many have great desire and very great will, and possibly great polarity. It seems to me that in some cases that there is a lack of information or awareness that creates a less than effective working in the magical sense. Am I correct in this analysis?


Ra: I am Ra. You are partially correct. In examining the polarity of a service-to-others working the free will must be seen as paramount. Those entities of which you speak are attempting to generate positive changes in consciousness while abridging free will. This causes the blockage of the magical nature of the working except in those cases wherein an entity freely desires to accept the working of the evangelist, as you have called it.

I think Ra's answer makes it clear that it is possible to infringe upon free will here in this density.

Yes, I don't see how this is even debatable. Just take a look at what various governments have done throughout history.

[Patrick]

Thank you Diana!  That resolves the matter completely for me.

I believe we do not like thinking that we abrogate freewill of others in a significant percentage of all our interactions with each others but there we are nonetheless.  It's the result of our cumulative collective choices over the past millenniums.  I really believe it would be possible to have a 3D society setup in a way where this is much less an issue.

83.12 Questioner: Then you say that there are no cases where those who are service-to-others oriented are using in any way techniques of enslavement that have grown as a result of the evolution of our social structures? Is this what you mean?

Ra: I am Ra. It was our understanding that your query concerned conditions before the veiling. There was no unconscious slavery, as you call this condition, at that period. At the present space/time the condition of well-meant and unintentional slavery are so numerous that it beggars our ability to enumerate them.

This, in my opinion, also speaks about freewill.  I take what Ra is saying to speak of parenting as well.  Our whole society is setup in a way where we think it's "normal".  But as Ra says, it beggars the ability to enumerate the well-meant and unintentional ways in which we abrogate each other's freewill.

[Sabou]

To me it is quite clear that any act upon another that takes something from them, against their wish would be an Infringement of free will of that person.
Whether it be the taking of their life, the taking of their right of how they want their body used, or putting someone under duress.
It seems like there shouldn't be too much confusion over this concept, taking the fact that we are indeed operating under other laws here in this 3d realm that we co-inhabit? 

[Glow]

We have independent will. Individualized creator has a path, no one is “free” though.

Research on this shows the subconscious makes decisions even though the conscious mind thinks it does.

It’s like input in, all collected data leads to choice A or B

Ra adding information not requested changes the subconscious awareness  therefore would change the data, and therefore the individuated consciousness’s path. Infringing on that free/independent will by altering their path with info not sought.

This is yet another reason forgiveness or judgment makes no sense.
Until a consiousness is given new data it can only do as it has been programmed via data.

To me that sounds like only recognizing humans as mind/body complexes rather than mind/body/spirit complexes. Also, it is to note that this is the density in which self-awareness grows and that this is veiled to an extent, so I don't think the power of individuated free will is at its strongest within our experience and instead develops through time. The dynamic that you speak of is because of the veil between the conscious and subconscious mind, which causes both of them to be largely unaware of the other in how we develop through them. Prior to the veil, I believe there was no such dynamics and the part of ourselves we consider conscious, and relate more strongly to, simply had more resources to itself that are now subconscious.

Free will is the most primal component of our experience from which everything stems. Then there are layers and layers of distortions that were generated by free will in weighting it down and constricting it into a more finite and complex experience. So to a large extent on the surface you may seem to merely be your environment, but more fundamentally beneath it all you are free will and the nature of it evolves through the densities.

The fallacy of forgiveness and judgment, which I agree with in terms of perceiving separation, is more rooted in that everything has the One as its source and so reflect what this One is. The circumstances are then holographic and the constant that is reflected is free will.

To go back to the thread, I do not believe it is possible in any way to infringe upon the first distortion of free will. Merely its extension generated by the Logos through the usage of the veil.

Awesome thoughts. I guess I should clarify, 1 I see that which we come in with as part of the "data" of the subconscious. So biases, distortions, energy leanings, ways of perception in born. To most that never awaken to higher energy centers or spiritual communion this is about as much mind/body/spirit as they get access to. So still this fits my understanding of lack of true "free will".

Where this changes is like you mentioned when one thins the veil, or starts to awaken and if they do the work, take the reins. This is not really of 3D though this is starting the work of higher energies than green ray activation. To choose catalyst as Ra says, in doing that one chooses what new catalytic experience to seek to change subconscious bias.
Same with the balancing exercises, have a bias toward sorrow or hatred, or anger, or whatever - choose new catalyst to balance it or work in consciousness on the balancing exercises to be less at the whims of the subconscious but instead drive and exert some form of actual FREE independent will.

There are also other ways of seeking to reprogram the subconscious if you utilize certain keys but still it is just adding a step to Ra's instructions on balancing and choosing catalyst. Once the subconscious is made more conscious the spirit can really shine through and though that is not the work of 3D yes more and more one would be able to be FREE.

I hope that wasn't to annoying to read, if you did. It is one of the adventures I have been taking the last year and a half in a more focused way. I wish all selves this freedom from the tangle of subconscious programing. To get to sort the tangle out, (blue ray?) and then choose the direction to take with the knew clearer understanding of self feels pretty wonderful.

Thanks for the conversation, it's ok if it doesn't vibe, it's just my perception, law of confusion of course, it was just kind of cool getting to explore it with another with Ra back ground. Your thoughts were ones I considered but ultimately found still fit the understanding. Add cosmic energies at birth and through ones life and it gets to be pretty beautiful like a tapestry.

[Glow]

73.12 ▶ Questioner: I would then assume that the many so-called evangelists which we have in our society at present, many have great desire and very great will, and possibly great polarity. It seems to me that in some cases that there is a lack of information or awareness that creates a less than effective working in the magical sense. Am I correct in this analysis?


Ra: I am Ra. You are partially correct. In examining the polarity of a service-to-others working the free will must be seen as paramount. Those entities of which you speak are attempting to generate positive changes in consciousness while abridging free will. This causes the blockage of the magical nature of the working except in those cases wherein an entity freely desires to accept the working of the evangelist, as you have called it.

I think Ra's answer makes it clear that it is possible to infringe upon free will here in this density.

Does it though? It specifically is talking about evangelists. Those that take on the identity of being a mediator between GOD and the common non connected folk. So in that way they are preporting to speak and represent higher awareness. For centuries people have done as the church says god commands so it's still a Godly higher authority, and they often wield surprising control upon the subconscious mind for that reason.

Also it is specifying magical workings which honestly have no resemblance to someone stopping or forcing another to do or not do something within the material world.

To heal one metaphysically when not requested moves the worker out of 3D vibration moves into a plane where if they realized enough oneness they could heal an individual of what might be significant programmed catalyst again going outside to a higher state to change an individuals path of life.

That is basically acting as god and removing a part of their syllabus for life. Not at all the same a Jimmy within 3D, kidnapping Bobby and making him work at his sugar plantation.

One is within 3D, and one is outside the parameters of 3D just like 4D ufos coming to exert influence within 3D would be infringing.

To me that quote is at best grey area but still fits in Spaced's parameters for free wills meaning.
"Spaced wrote - The point I am trying to make is that every single case of Ra making reference to free will infringement involves the revelation of higher density information to third density incarnate beings who are not ready or have not put in the work to receive it."

I'm not trying to force an opinion by the way I just find this to be a fascinating discussion. Thanks for starting the thread and to all who contribute.

[Glow]

Hey Spaced, this is a really interesting question, and a pattern that I didn't pick up myself before. I would think that the reason why "infringement of freewill" is not used when dealing with interactions between planetary entities (except for all those skilled adepts running around) is potentially twofold:

Me too. it's a wonderful surprise I hadn't seen.

2. The Law of Freewill has also been named the Law of Confusion. We cannot infringe on each other's experience of confusion because we are confused entities ourselves, therefore we do not have the spiritual status to act from a place of authority in removing confusion for another entity. Therefore we (3D entities) cannot infringe in this way.

That is a really interesting thought too! Makes a lot of sense.

[Glow]

I really am enjoying the interpersonal aspects within these posts.
Great folks and great conversation. Really thank you all.

[Patrick]

I think I am equating freewill with freedom. Not sure why, but I can't differentiate.

[Steppingfeet]

Spaced, in response to the OP I was going to express gratitude for a fascinating question + accompanying research, but then multiple other people did that, so I’m not going to tell you that I find this a fascinating question, which it is. : )

Over the years I have encountered multiple surprises in the Law of One like this that turn up only when running a keyword search and reading every iteration. I hadn’t run this particular one before, so it’s something of a minor revelation to know that Ra used the term “infringement” almost entirely in association with the relationship between higher and lower-density beings. Thank you for that. Having not run the search myself, I shall trust your findings, but I shall arrive at a different conclusion.

I understand why you would arrive at your conclusion, but my takeaway from your search is that higher-to-lower infringement is only one type of infringement, one that was particularly germane to the contact. Ra, a sixth-density SMC, was relating to a group of three third-density humans whilst exploring much about the relationship between third-density beings and their higher-density polarized counterparts.

My larger understanding is that infringement can occur between any two sentient beings capable of making the Choice.

Let’s take an extreme example and consider chattel slavery. What could be a greater violation of the inherent free will within the other-self than to wholly subvert and deny them their exercise of free will?

As chattel, the other-self is identified as property from birth to death, to be bought and sold in an exercise of ownership over nearly every aspect of their lives, from their living conditions, to their daily activities, to their health, to the ability to inflict pain and torture with impunity, to the fate their body, their children, their family, etc., with little capacity for the enslaved to say “no” or request alternative or otherwise deny the master.

In the enslaved person’s heart is the desire to be free—free to make their own choices, determine their own movements, and chart their own course in self-sovereignty. What is it but to infringe by imposing your (general “your”) will on the other and robbing the other-self of those full array of choices? Instead of honoring the sovereignty of the other, you are making them a tool of your own free will, forcing and coercing – often through physical and psychological violence – the other-self to serve you and do your bidding.

Merriam Webster: to infringe:

1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

To continue exploring this question in the extremes (where it’s clearer), this proclivity for infringement is the M.O. of those seeking to polarize their consciousness negatively.

Ra describes that the energy spectrum of the STS entity is missing the green ray, the ray of acceptance, of love. What is it the STS entity is not accepting but the divinity and sovereignty of the other-self, that is, the other-self’s sacred right to the exercise of free will.

Instead of acceptance, the STS entity practices control. The other-self, naturally, doesn’t want to be controlled*, thus to impose control upon them is to literally infringe on their free will.

[*Unless perhaps they seek willing enslavement in order to advance negatively. And we needn’t explore consensual BDSM - the crux of actual infringement is non-consent.]

My general point is that the capacity for a third-density entity to infringe upon the free will of another third-density entity can be extrapolated and substantiated within the substance of the philosophy without needing the exact keyword to appear as a verb. My supposition, at least.

However, extrapolation need not be our only method. Without having run a search myself, I know that there is at least one instance of “infringement” used in the third-density context, though it also surely applies to all polarized densities:

18.6 Questioner: Basically, I would say that to infringe on the free will of another self, or another entity, would be the basic thing never to do under the Law of One. Can you state any other breaking of the Law of One than this basic rule?

Ra: […] The distortions to be avoided are those which do not take into consideration the distortions of the focus of energy of love/light, or shall we say, the Logos of this particular sphere, or density. These include the lack of understanding of the needs of the natural environment, the needs of other-selves’ mind/body/spirit complexes. These are many due to the various distortions of man-made complexes in which the intelligence and awareness of entities themselves have chosen a way of using the energies available.

Thus, what would be an improper distortion with one entity is proper with another. We can suggest an attempt to become aware of the other-self as self and thus do that action which is needed by other-self, understanding from the other-self’s intelligence and awareness. In many cases this does not involve the breaking of the distortion of Free Will into a distortion, or fragmentation, called infringement. However, it is a delicate matter to be of service, and compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness. […]

Now whether decisions of certain third-density individuals or governments or societies actions are *actual* infringements upon free will, and whether, if so, some infringements may be warranted (as may happen in legal code or for a collective good)... these are the questions that are the the stuff of third density. And beyond my powers to figure out from my standpoint of confusion.

But Louisabell asked the most important question. We must know whether arrow face made it in the club.

[Sacred Fool]

Now whether decisions of certain third-density individuals or governments or societies actions are *actual* infringements upon free will, and whether, if so, some infringements may be warranted (as may happen in legal code or for a collective good)... these are the questions that are the the stuff of third density. And beyond my powers to figure out from my standpoint of confusion.

Perhaps this is the point of the quotation above, viz., there is no objective standard, per se, of what constitutes infringement?  Each must work it out for oneself.  There are other passages where it's clear that the larger concern is karma accrued from such acts, and one does not accrue karma when one is unaware of the infringement.  So, was there infringement in such cases?  Yes, form one perspective and no from another?

Perhaps it comes down to how much responsibility an entity is willing and able to take for....for....for existence?  For consciousness?

     

[flofrog]

Steppingfeet, I like that note of ' one type of infringement '.

As Glow said, great thread, thank you Spaced.

Also I love the quote offered by Sacred Fool :

14 MARCH 2009 Wrote:
However, it is indeed possible within third density for people to infringe upon each others’ free will in ways that do involve karma. Take for instance the institution that you call marriage. A marriage of equal partners may involve many spirited discussions, but if one of the mates reserves the right to give orders to the other, there has been an infringement upon the free will of that individual whose liberties have been limited without his or her consent.

In a work situation it is entirely acceptable for the leader to give orders to the employee as long as they do not shame him or abase him or disrespect him as a human being. When one entity uses a weapon to coerce or force another to do his bidding, whether it is in criminal acts or acts of war, this, too, goes beyond the bounds of acceptable usage and constitutes an infringement upon the free will of the one who is limited.

There is no question but that in all of those three circumstances and more there is much infringement upon free will among your people. To those who feel that there is a question as to whether they are acting appropriately or whether they are moving beyond the bounds of acceptable influence and infringing upon another’s free will, we might suggest that, in your mind, you turn the tables and see the situation as happening the opposite way, not from you to another but from another to you. If, in that turnaround, you see the goodness of your actions, you are most likely behaving appropriately and maintaining unity between yourself and the other self. If, when you turn the tables, you realize you would resent such a thing were it to happen to you, then you know that you have infringed upon the rights, the peace, and the liberty of another.

And YES, did he make it into the club ?

[Steppingfeet]

Now whether decisions of certain third-density individuals or governments or societies actions are *actual* infringements upon free will, and whether, if so, some infringements may be warranted (as may happen in legal code or for a collective good)... these are the questions that are the the stuff of third density. And beyond my powers to figure out from my standpoint of confusion.

Perhaps this is the point of the quotation above, viz., there is no objective standard, per se, of what constitutes infringement?  Each must work it out for oneself.  There are other passages where it's clear that the larger concern is karma accrued from such acts, and one does not accrue karma when one is unaware of the infringement.  So, was there infringement in such cases?  Yes, form one perspective and no from another?

Perhaps it comes down to how much responsibility an entity is willing and able to take for....for....for existence?  For consciousness?

     

"...there is no objective standard, per se, of what constitutes infringement?"

That's a really interesting question. I'm not entirely sure myself. To think out loud while responding... it seems that there could be several possibilities:

(1A) There is a universal, objective standard which is unaffected by the subjective perceptions of whether and how infringement has occurred
(1B) There is a universal, objective standard which is affected by, or does take into account, the subjective perceptions of whether and how infringement has occurred.

(2) There is no universal, objective standard that measures and certifies the occurrence of infringement. Infringement is all an entirely subjective exercise dependent upon whether one or both or multiple involved parties perceive infringement to have transpired.

I would lean toward 1B in one formula or another. Reasons:

On the objective side: Third-Density Entity A may not think that they have infringed upon the free will of another, they may even feel right and justified in the action, but nevertheless - by the operational laws of the universe combined with their own post-incarnational/higher self assessment - they will reap the fruit of their infringing actions. Whether that is a reduction in harvestability (if polarizing positively), a blockage/imbalance in their energy system with subsequent change to their violet-ray spectrum, and/or an accretion of karma.

As Spaced pointed out, there is a good deal explored in the RC about infringement between those of higher densities in relationship to those of lower. It is a specialized case that involves a dance with free will that I don't fully understand, but it may offer some window. They of the higher densities seem always to be assessing for the prospect of infringement in decision-making, sometimes determining that infringement has occurred, against some kind of universal measure or standard. Their understanding of that standard becomes more subtle, refined, and enlightened with evolution.

On the subjective side: The subjective perceptions of each involved party (the one doing the infringing and the one done unto) and the variety of responses that each may have in their conscious appraisal of the situation must yet play a role.

Simple examples: maybe the infringer feels guilt and remorse, or castigates the self, and thus resolves to make amends, seek forgiveness, and make more loving future choices. Maybe the infringer feels smug and satisfied, or feels even a perverse joy in the infringement, thus seeking more.

Maybe the one who is infringed upon does not perceive infringement to have occurred, or maybe they feel a diminishment of power, or a desire for retribution, or an opportunity to express compassion, understanding, and forgiveness, etc.

Point being, there is an interplay between the infinitely subjective perceptions that will affect or layer over the objective occurrence of the infringement.

Again, just thoughts out loud. Always appreciate the opportunity to dance with other thinkers in this forum.

[Glow]

I hesitated to add this part. It’s not strictly LOO so I will point that out but since discussion has evolved I will add it. Feel free to mention if it’s not thread appropriate.

Interpretation has been injected by others so why not.

When I was with the shamanic group you learn to work in consciousness with intent and will.
Magic to some, adept work perhaps to some, either way higher than the 3D facing in the physical of will/intent between beings of solid form. Equal “battle of wills” or “negotiation of will”

Anyways in work in consiousness you are taught to direct and focus intent and then use will to push your intent like a bow projecting an arrow in the energetic tapestry. It works. I saw it work.

I had to quit because when it came to will, we were supposed to practice with people in daily life.
Not just as we meet our intent and will in the physical finding it natural resolution but also going outside that to work with the energy the other has no consious knowledge how to harness and use.

My personal trail stopped there. After I saw it work on tiny things I realized it’s power imbalance and like a wall I could not continue. No judgment that others could but to me it was like an energetic break in me following that path.

It definitely was infringement as our access to the use of will was now significantly stacked in my favour.

Independent personal wills can interact in 3D sometimes ones’ will gets its way sometimes another’s.

The higher conscious use of will when the other does not wield it equally, that to me was a very clear no go. I couldn’t even do the excercises after seeing it worked because even minor things of no consequences I could have steam rolled them. Very useful for eliciting change but focused on an individual or population it’s definitely what I recognized as true free will infringement.

Free/independent will finds it path, sometimes it wins out, sometimes the collective will or a conflicting will stops it. It’s not infringement though, resolution of equally weighted wills.

Add a different type of power or ability to wield and it’s pure infringement hence the quarantine of earth to non 3D beings.

Anyways just sharing a different experience not saying anyone has to agree.
It was a very difficult experience because I loved that path, it like L/L is why I am still in the physical, but also it was illuminating to where my literal soul would not go.

Like a road that ended at the edge of the world, no guilt, no fear or conflict just a “path that was not” for this creator,
I can still see it like a road that drove off into nothing.

I also am not saying controlling others is great.
It’s better if we can be respectful and compassionate but still one 3D will getting past the resistant of others 3D will is not a violation.

it’s the one creator and for all parts to get their way on all things, we’d need to completly work together with a super computer to have that even be possible, even with all wanting it.

So some not getting to do as they wish is unfortunately part of the system till we are aligned and a SMC starts to form. It’s inherently unavoidable and part of the system of non SMC 3D. Harmonization will resolve that but for now no one gets true freedom.

[Sacred Fool]

 
Other-self SF, you may want to consider whether or not you are over thinking all this by a considerable margin.  It may be better to look at it, not so much as mechanistic natural laws, but as adaptable principles which provide a vehicle for self exploration.  Glow's example is a good one.  Another is the "fact," as told by alien informants, that high flying, high density groups have gone to different planets to offer aid and even they have screwed up the balance of infringement.  Moreover, they brought their plans before an all wise Council of whatever-it-is and still they screwed it up.  If it's not obvious to these folks, why should it come to you or me in a package of facile comprehension?  That is to say, I just don't think it works that way.

I'm suggesting that expending so much energy trying to map out the illusion may be something to reconsider.  Seeking the balances within (as in the Glow example) might be a better use of energy....if you're into that sort of thing, of course.

    

[Patrick]

I think we screwed it up for them. They simply cannot plumb the patterns that infects us.

[Diana]

I'm suggesting that expending so much energy trying to map out the illusion may be something to reconsider.  Seeking the balances within (as in the Glow example) might be a better use of energy....if you're into that sort of thing, of course.  

Yeah, I agree. Even though it can be so much fun to intellectualize and analyze—I am particularly fond of it at times—ultimately it can go in the direction of imbalance. An analogy would be Christians who only look for their answers in the Christian Bible. There is just so much more to life, perception, catalyst, and the whole interplay of existence, most of which is beyond our comprehension. There is the mystery...and that is an exciting realm to venture into. As Ra said about the Archetypes: They haunt rather than explicate. 

So to just find the answers in the Ra Material, is limiting in my view. It's a remarkable and awesome reference, but we must do the work on our own paths. We must make The Choice, and even without the Ra Contact, it can be seen in the world that that Choice is quite obvious.

And now to totally sidestep what I said in my opening above and indulge in some more intellectualizing...

The idea that this existence is a stage to act upon and be acted upon, that we are being offered catalyst and everything is catalyst, does suggest that there could really be no infringement upon free will because, for one thing, the person being infringed upon would also have a choice in not taking what is offered. 

However, as others have said here, there seems to be repercussions if one does try and exert control over another. Even the advanced, harvestable, STS individual must pay a higher price for harvestability, and then must let it go in 6th density. So doesn't that suggest that there is an underlying order, in any density as it all derives from the same unmanifested source, of the distortion of free will and its, for lack of a better word, sacredness?

And then there is that little niggling feeling one gets, which Glow described, when one if violating, or about to violate, the free will of another. This is a big clue in my estimation.

[Minyatur]

Other-self SF, you may want to consider whether or not you are over thinking all this by a considerable margin.  It may be better to look at it, not so much as mechanistic natural laws, but as adaptable principles which provide a vehicle for self exploration.  Glow's example is a good one.  Another is the "fact," as told by alien informants, that high flying, high density groups have gone to different planets to offer aid and even they have screwed up the balance of infringement.  Moreover, they brought their plans before an all wise Council of whatever-it-is and still they screwed it up.  If it's not obvious to these folks, why should it come to you or me in a package of facile comprehension?  That is to say, I just don't think it works that way.   

I don't think that in the grand schemes of things they ever really screwed anything up, let's say that they are teach/learning. To quote Ra:
I am Ra. There are no mistakes.
I am Ra. There are no mistakes under the Law of One.
I am Ra. The Law is One. There are no mistakes.
I am Ra. There are no mistakes. Be at rest, my friend. Each of you is most conscientious. All is well.
There are no mistakes, including the action of this instrument.
Free will does not mean that there will be no circumstances when calculations will be awry. This is so in all aspects of the life experience. Although there are no mistakes, there are surprises.

Does this need to be overstated further?

I think the only manner in which we can act is from a place of imbalance, because perfect balance would be to be completely transparent to your reality and this is not the luxury of being a creature of our densities (including 6D). Our entire existences within this Octave hold upon distortions, they are states of tensions. So these calculations going awry are part of the process of learn/teaching and a basic component of how All is well. So in a way, they literally do need to make these miscalculations to advance upon their path and this is the service that they have to offer to Creation, the expression of their distorted being.

The most balanced we can be is probably to be in a state of simply answering what comes to you, but the manner in which you may or may not answer is still distorted by the confines of your existence. Your self is meant to be unique, offering something unique. There is no known ultimate service but the expression of this being.

This is all why there is ultimately no free will infringement. Sure there is free will infringement as a component of experiencing duality as self and other-selves, but in knowledge of the context of existence there is only the Creator knowing Itself. Forever withholding yourself from expressing where you are at in the end simply delays yourself from offering the service that you have to offer, it is inevitable. I think the balancing of love and wisdom is a whole lot about this. Think of a bit how the material says one can re-polarize as positive if one ends up in 4D negative, that is to learn the lessons of 4D negative. There is no going around the acceptance of what is, simply working with it so that it moves forward.

Basically, in Ra's wisdom they know that everything is proper in its own time and space, in their love they do not necessarily feel it within all things though. These imbalances will cast shadows in whatever interactions they have and the path forward is always acceptance. The more they learn from the shadows cat by their imbalances, they more they grow in balance and acceptance.

Within our 3D, everyone should probably give themselves a break and forgive. Easier said than done though.

[Sacred Fool]

Within our 3D, everyone should probably give themselves a break and forgive. Easier said than done though.

I wouldn't disagree with what you express in your post, yet somehow this perspective has to be brought down to Earth, as it were.  That is, we take on some degree of responsibility and commit ourselves to working through the situations we're given according to our commitments.  Thus, for example, Ra is committed to holding humanity's hand for as it takes to make up for the screw ups they made unwittingly while trying to be of service and trying not to mess things up.

  

[Minyatur]

Within our 3D, everyone should probably give themselves a break and forgive. Easier said than done though.

I wouldn't disagree with what you express in your post, yet somehow this perspective has to be brought down to Earth, as it were.  That is, we take on some degree of responsibility and commit ourselves to working through the situations we're given according to our commitments.  Thus, for example, Ra is committed to holding humanity's hand for as it takes to make up for the screw ups they made unwittingly while trying to be of service and trying not to mess things up.

The forgiving part is more about not creating further karma needlessly.

I think those of Ra are tied to us because they come from our sister planet, so it is part of their exercises of teach/learning for advancing in their density. This is my guess though, but would mean that they never were really supposed to be perfect in their interactions with us. The notion of "screw up" could make sense to be undesirable within the density of love (4D), but clearly not the density of unity (6D). Like they say at the beginning: We are not those of the Love or of the Light.

[flofrog]

The forgiving part is more about not creating further karma needlessly.

I think those of Ra are tied to us because they come from our sister planet, so it is part of their exercises of teach/learning for advancing in their density. This is my guess though, but would mean that they never were really supposed to be perfect in their interactions with us. The notion of "screw up" could make sense to be undesirable within the density of love (4D), but clearly not the density of unity (6D). Like they say at the beginning: We are not those of the Love or of the Light.

Sorry Minyatur, just out of curiosity, where did you see at the beginning that Ra quotes that they are not those of the Love or of the Light ? Just curious,