+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Evolved from trees? (/showthread.php?tid=2762)
Pages:
1
2
Evolved from trees? - zack231 - 06-03-2011
What do you think Ra meant here I am reading throught the Ra Material for the 4th time... No Joke I have read through the Books 1 to 5 three times now and am three quarters the way through book 2 once again... I love reading them and studying them.. And this has stumped me everytime... What did Ra mean here by saying " Bearing the name dog"?
Quote:Questioner: I was wondering if that particular social memory complex from the Sirius star evolved from trees?
Ra: I am Ra. This approaches correctness. Those second-density vegetation forms which graduated into third-density upon this planet bearing the name of Dog were close to the tree as you know it.
RE: Evolved from trees? - zenmaster - 06-03-2011
(06-03-2011, 12:41 AM)zack231 Wrote: What did Ra mean here by saying " Bearing the name dog"?Sirius "...Many cultures have historically attached special significance to Sirius, particularly in relation to dogs. Indeed, it is often colloquially called the "Dog Star" as the brightest star of Canis Major, the "Great Dog" constellation...."
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-03-2011
You know what is very interesting? I have a book called The Lion People which is a channeled teaching from the Paschats, felines from the future of Sirius. They claimed that there was a tree-like race which could uproot itself and walk around, and also that the regular trees were all in regular telepathy contact. They also discuss another race from the other planet in the Sirius system called the Ishnaan, or Crystal People, whom are supposed to be basically humanoid but with "crystal"-like substance.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Oceania - 06-03-2011
like the Ents!
RE: Evolved from trees? - zenmaster - 06-03-2011
It appears that any habitable planet(s) in that system would need to orbit inside of Sirius B's orbit: http://www.exoplaneten.de/sirius/english.html . It's worth noting that Larson would have Sirius A be an old star (billions of years).
However, conventional astronomy, which has stellar evolution "backwards", would have it be young "only 300 million years", with the following logical deduction: "Any planet of Sirius would be a young world, covered by warm, shallow oceans. If any continents could have formed already, they would be small, uneroded and volcanic."
Ironically, only 8 ly away, due to conventional knowledge, the Sirius system has been ruled out for the possibility of life existing:
"Any kind of life on our model planet will die before it ever had a chance to grow. Sirius will leave the main sequence in only 700 million years at best, destroying all the planets it may have. For this reason, stars of type A are routinely excluded from the search for extraterrestrial life. "
Or has it? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42270969/ns/technology_and_science-discovery_com/t/dont-rule-out-life-those-dead-stars-just-yet/
A recording of Hickson's interview (who encountered beings from Sirius) may be found here: http://www.konsulting.com/audio_clips.htm
"This recording was obtained from Wendy Connors and William Jones, who have agreed that this audio clip should be made available to researchers. Recorded within a couple of hours following their abduction, this 30 minute recording was made without Mr. Hickson or Mr. Parker's knowledge and had not been known to exist to the general crypto-aeronautic community until now."
(06-03-2011, 01:15 AM)Azrael Wrote: You know what is very interesting? I have a book called The Lion People which is a channeled teaching from the Paschats, felines from the future of Sirius. They claimed that there was a tree-like race which could uproot itself and walk around,Not really interesting at all, if you consider they just borrowed seminal info from the Ra material.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-03-2011
Or you know, other entities than Ra probably know what's going on? I can hardly imagine that Ra has some monolopy on "truth", but rather that Ra descibes MECHANICS with purity.
It irritates me that this material is sometimes treated as the "end all" of channeled teachings. It is true it is very comprehensive and I'm sure "accurate", but the language and technicality can interfere for people who are still learning more basic lessons. Not to mention Ra itself claims its knowledge is quite relatively narrow as far as the universe goes. It is only giving an account of itself, this must always be remembered, Ra is not God.
Not to steal Ra's thunder or anything, but I have a pretty good feeling Ra would share the sentiments. Nor do I mean to be touchy, Zen, but equality of information and source is something on my mind a lot lately. Ultimately these things are all just thought systems, they are ways of trying to comprehend the One. This LOO is good for many people here because it is modern, technical and deals directly with our experience, however other people whom are seeking through other paths are doing just as equally well, whether STO or STS. As Ra says, one does not need to be consciously aware of the Law of One to evolve, learn and choose. If you will dismiss something on the basis of similarity I would fear you are getting way too drawn in to classification and "placement" and losing the natural beauty of parallel information. Of course, just my opinion. Blessings, adonai
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-03-2011
I hear ya , Az, and I I feel you too.
Zen isn't against it or against you referencing it. I don't think so anyway. Zen is simply throwing some more info our way. The more info the better, yes?
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-03-2011
I understand that, it was more the connotation of the wording that was negative and dismissive. And also the idea that the info was "borrowed" from the Ra material. I'm sure there are lots entities just as far in their evolution as Ra and I just think it's silly to consider the LOO material as any more of a "primary" source than any other.
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-03-2011
Yeah. That's Zen's style.
It's funny (sorry For talking behind ur back, Zen), I used to take his style negatively too. Then there was one off the cuff comment from Zen that broke loose, and I finally "got" zen.
RE: Evolved from trees? - zenmaster - 06-03-2011
Steal Ra's thunder? Really, it's obvious that many channeled sources are largely infuenced by popular culture and new-age subculture. The info grows according to what the intuition suggests in order to fill in the knowledge gaps. And one draws from what came prior. That is, the terminology, the predominant conceptualizations. Here we have lord of the rings + ra (or rather, ra's answers to don's conceptualization). At this level of intuitive perception, we only have ad hoc, ephemeral notions of almost pure invention. These are just signposts for people to wonder about - like a dream, they're not experential facts. sometimes people ted to forget that.
RE: Evolved from trees? - unity100 - 06-03-2011
(06-03-2011, 12:58 PM)Azrael Wrote: I understand that, it was more the connotation of the wording that was negative and dismissive. And also the idea that the info was "borrowed" from the Ra material. I'm sure there are lots entities just as far in their evolution as Ra and I just think it's silly to consider the LOO material as any more of a "primary" source than any other.
it isnt silly to consider Ra material as primary source for assessing the reliability of any other information - ra material was channeled in a meticulous fashion. it isnt conscious channeling, it isnt a single person channeling, it isnt a few people channeling in front of an audience or anything like some other 'channels' (questionable) do.
the whole point of Ra material is, it is a reliable piece of information, which also relays some important mechanics.
the former and latter can both be used to assess reliability of other information. a piece of information conflicting with mechanics from a reliable source, especially when it doesnt give or explain any mechanics or reasons to explain the conflict, is questionable.
moreover what zen said is also true - many later sources borrowed a lot from Ra material. whether this is due to the principles behind the sources being the same, or, direct borrowing to prop up a piece of information, is a matter of debate for each channeling.
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-03-2011
There is plenty of pre-1980 sources which are in Ra material. Plenty.
RE: Evolved from trees? - kycahi - 06-03-2011
Az, I agree that the Ra material has layers of information that will confuse and even disturb some readers. Did me, in fact. Now, however, I appreciate that density cuz I keep getting more from reading it.
By the L/L threesome's choosing to publish the material literally, without trying to "clean it up" or make it "clearer," they blessed it with unfiltered purity and also left in some wording that turns away some readers who can't get past it. I can't help but feel a tiny bit judgmental saying that the material causes those not ready for it to reject it, but that's best IMHO.
Ra and especially Q'uo emphasize to the reader/listener to exercise critical judgment and reject what doesn't seem right. The other side of that coin would be, IMO, to say listen to other sources and accept from them what resonates, too.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Oceania - 06-03-2011
i don't think it's the end all, but it is useful and accurate scientifically. plus of course we talk about Ra because this is Bring4th. i follow many channels. i never blindly believe any of them. but i take what resonates.
RE: Evolved from trees? - vbaba - 06-07-2011
(06-03-2011, 12:41 AM)zack231 Wrote: What do you think Ra meant here I am reading throught the Ra Material for the 4th time... No Joke I have read through the Books 1 to 5 three times now and am three quarters the way through book 2 once again... I love reading them and studying them.. And this has stumped me everytime... What did Ra mean here by saying " Bearing the name dog"?
Quote:Questioner: I was wondering if that particular social memory complex from the Sirius star evolved from trees?
Ra: I am Ra. This approaches correctness. Those second-density vegetation forms which graduated into third-density upon this planet bearing the name of Dog were close to the tree as you know it.
This one understands that 2nd Density Plants and Animals were seeded here from other star systems, including those of Sirius. That the highest evolved of 2nd Density animal is the house cat and the highest form of 2nd Density plant is the Sequoia Tree, which Ra is indicating in this quote, was seeded from Sirius. That 2nd Density is experienced as the 'group soul' and not aware of itself. That 2nd Density offers itself to 3rd Density when it has exhausted all experiences in that Density.
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-07-2011
House cat!!!???? That's crazy!! (no offense. Exaggerating)
I would think a parrot would be higher than a cat.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-07-2011
Evolution cannot be judged by what one knows but by what one creates out of what they know. There is nothing that is "ad hoc", only amalgamates. Even Lord of the Rings is valid as a teaching tool, and interacting with its concepts and world DO affect and change your conceptions just as every other little stimulation shifts everything every so slightly. Third dimensional experience is not limited to factual science, this simply is not how it is. We are experiencings things on multiple levels, there are areas of our sub-conscious which are always learning things that we have yet to even fathom.
Everything is useful, and the meticulous fashion of the Ra material, as I said, is still only an account of Ra and we must always remember that even Ra still had/has evolution to complete at the point of the channeling. Also, I think it is very notable that Ra went through considerably different experitential nexi and developed as a pure entity of order. This means that the organized manner of the teachings are in fact means for those seeking order.
I can tell you that even the mechanics, although pure, are the mechanics of order and thus are still biased and still not completely accurate as they are only according to Ra's understanding as it has expressed it. I know Ra is no longer polarized, and likely DOES possess plenty of information on chaotic principles, but it is very particularly stated that Ra will not express these things as it desires Order. It loves order, and loves through order. Of course, don't mistake the word "order", I simply mean it in the sense of coherency and organization, crystallization. Other entities love through chaos. Each desires to share that which it has come to love, they desire to share the love with others.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Oceania - 06-08-2011
why would a parrot be higher? the ability to talk? i thought a beloved pet, such as a feline would be very high. unlike a dog they actually think independently.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-08-2011
I guess it depends what you use as a standard for evolution! Aha
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-08-2011
Yeah. Cats are on that STS path
. (I know how touchy the cat vs dog thing is 
)I picked a random animal. Parrots are very intelligent. The only smart thing I see cats doing is steering clear of me. Hahaha
RE: Evolved from trees? - Oceania - 06-08-2011
i'm a huge Cat Person, we shouldn't start talking about this or we'll end up fighting like the cartoons!
RE: Evolved from trees? - Brittany - 06-08-2011
(06-03-2011, 12:13 PM)Azrael Wrote: Or you know, other entities than Ra probably know what's going on? I can hardly imagine that Ra has some monolopy on "truth", but rather that Ra descibes MECHANICS with purity.
It irritates me that this material is sometimes treated as the "end all" of channeled teachings. It is true it is very comprehensive and I'm sure "accurate", but the language and technicality can interfere for people who are still learning more basic lessons. Not to mention Ra itself claims its knowledge is quite relatively narrow as far as the universe goes. It is only giving an account of itself, this must always be remembered, Ra is not God.
Not to steal Ra's thunder or anything, but I have a pretty good feeling Ra would share the sentiments. Nor do I mean to be touchy, Zen, but equality of information and source is something on my mind a lot lately. Ultimately these things are all just thought systems, they are ways of trying to comprehend the One. This LOO is good for many people here because it is modern, technical and deals directly with our experience, however other people whom are seeking through other paths are doing just as equally well, whether STO or STS. As Ra says, one does not need to be consciously aware of the Law of One to evolve, learn and choose. If you will dismiss something on the basis of similarity I would fear you are getting way too drawn in to classification and "placement" and losing the natural beauty of parallel information. Of course, just my opinion. Blessings, adonai
Amen! Amen! Amen!
Not trying to take sides here...just the general information conveyed I agree with completely! The Ra Material has been a great springboard for me, but I've found tons and tons of other sources, along with my own intuitive experiences, that have expanded my concept of the universe even farther.
Still, I can see why some people tend to stick with one particular source or another. It is easier for some people to narrow their focus in order to make the learning more potent and accelerate their growth, or the source simply resonates with them a great deal. I'm more of a broad spectrum kind of person, taking a little bit here and there. It might take me a lot longer to come full circle, but I'm okay with that. I look forward to many future adventures.
Most cats hate me, by the way. Babies tend to dislike me as well.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Oceania - 06-08-2011
maybe they see you as a fellow kitty. i am more of a servant. so they recognize me not as a peer.
why is it faster if you only read Ra? to me it's faster to take what i get from different places. i read channelings, i study religions, i get stuff from TV shows, cartoons, books... it's everywhere. triggers and reminders.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Brittany - 06-08-2011
I meant that if you focus all of your attention on one source, you are likely to reach an understanding of that source quicker than if you spread your attention out amongst other sources. Like if I was debating between studying algebra or contemporary poetry...if I devoted all my time to the algebra, at the end of a given period of time I would probably be more adept in algebra than if I had divided my time and studied both algebra and poetry. If I chose the latter I would have some skills in both categories, but it would take longer to master both of them. Either approach can be useful, though.
RE: Evolved from trees? - 3DMonkey - 06-08-2011
(06-08-2011, 07:44 PM)ahktu Wrote: I meant that if you focus all of your attention on one source, you are likely to reach an understanding of that source quicker than if you spread your attention out amongst other sources. Like if I was debating between studying algebra or contemporary poetry...if I devoted all my time to the algebra, at the end of a given period of time I would probably be more adept in algebra than if I had divided my time and studied both algebra and poetry. If I chose the latter I would have some skills in both categories, but it would take longer to master both of them. Either approach can be useful, though.
Ahhhhh. This is only a theory of yours. The applicable effect of which is to establish your theory as accepted fact before you even set out to learn.
"No boxes. No no, no boxes. I will not build a wall today". (silly dance, silly dance)." No no, no boxes."
RE: Evolved from trees? - vbaba - 06-09-2011
(06-07-2011, 03:10 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: House cat!!!???? That's crazy!! (no offense. Exaggerating)
I would think a parrot would be higher than a cat.
Its just information. Take it or leave it! -vb
[quote='Azrael' pid='42264' dateline='1307484795']
Evolution cannot be judged by what one knows but by what one creates out of what they know.
oh really? We understood that anything is possible!
Your quote reminds me of a quote of Leonardo daVinci: that "All sciences are vain and full of errors that are not born of Experience, mother of all certainty. True sciences are the result of Experiences which has passed through the senses".
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-10-2011
I do believe we are saying the same thing. You only truly know what you experience!
RE: Evolved from trees? - Ankh - 06-10-2011
(06-07-2011, 06:13 PM)Azrael Wrote: I know Ra is no longer polarized
That quote kept me thinking... Ra said that they lacked the polarity, whatever it means, but Ra also said this:
RA Wrote:I am Ra. This query is marginal. We will make the concession towards information with some loss of polarity due to free will being abridged.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Unbound - 06-10-2011
I wonder if the polarity was lost for Ra or for the instrument? Perhaps polarity on the higher realms is more directly related to your choices and less on karmic principles?
I need to start a thread on this idea I had that these LOO are only from an INSTANCE of Ra and in fact there are likely many "Ra"s spread out across all time and densities, each either their own particular perspective at that point in time. There could even be a Ra that is STS. Very peculiar to think about.
RE: Evolved from trees? - Bring4th_Austin - 06-10-2011
(06-10-2011, 05:51 PM)Ankh Wrote:(06-07-2011, 06:13 PM)Azrael Wrote: I know Ra is no longer polarized
That quote kept me thinking... Ra said that they lacked the polarity, whatever it means, but Ra also said this:
RA Wrote:I am Ra. This query is marginal. We will make the concession towards information with some loss of polarity due to free will being abridged.
Hmm...puzzler. Ra says that in 6D, the negative polarity is abandoned. They never said that the positive polarity is abandoned, but without negative, and with 6D being "of no polarity," how is positive polarity still possible?
Maybe what Ra means by polarity in this case is purity: undistorted understanding of the Law of One. Perhaps Ra is accepting a lessening of purity by knowingly applying distortions to the Law of One by abridging free will.
(06-10-2011, 05:58 PM)Azrael Wrote: I wonder if the polarity was lost for Ra or for the instrument?
I don't think Ra would sacrifice polarity that wasn't their own, or if that is even possible.