______

[GentleWanderer]

______

[Ankh]

I do believe too that this material is one of the most pure and undistorted sources available on Earth. And to answer your question, just *because of it being just that* it contains *that particular light or energy* which, when it enters the seeker and awakening within it that inner same light, needs to be balanced. So, if there is in the seeker any distortions which are in the direct opposition compared to the teach/learning of the LOO, then these need to be balanced before any progression can be made. 
I have not felt any negative energies when studying this material personally, except those which had to do with personal blockages or distortions. 

Very interesting concept, you're saying the light it contains acts as a pointer for our own distortions and is like a mirror. This is something i'm trying to understand more deeply.

Yes, that is what I am saying. I've seen some people who are positively oriented in the beginning and are happy with finding Ra material, but then, as time goes by and they try to absorb that light/energy within, it doesn't work out well for them. And after a while they blame the Ra material for things that go wrong and think, on contrary to what they thought in the beginning that this material was "good", that it now is "bad" or negatively oriented instead. But I don't think that it's anything wrong with that. It's just that they were not ready for the intensity of the light. You know a saying that goes like: the closer you stand to the light the darker are the shadows. The negative aspects within the self has to be balanced in a pace that one is comfortable with, or as daddy Ra put it - it is inappropriate to move more quickly than one's feet may walk. This is my theory and not a knowing of course. =)

[Aion]

I would say that I have not had any distinct transformation of my impression of the material from first interacting with it. My first impressions were still in the vein of my current impressions. However I have substantially 'unpacked' or learned of many of the intricacies in that initial impression.

I do agree that it causes a energization of all of one's distortions. However, the question for me has never been 'good or bad' but rather, what is the dynamic that is taking place? Rather than viewing the material as a 'thing in itself', I view it as a collage of relationships and interactions, each which serves to potentially illustrate or illuminate some part of the Creation in that you SHOULD be able to find both positive and negative philosophy in it if it is truly relating to Unity. That might strike some people as strange, but I think that's actually fundamental to the whole concept of Free Will as espoused by the Law of Confusion. They need to make both philosophies available.

So when I am talking about these entity interactions, I believe that Ra can totally see what is going on, yet is willing to allow things to take place for the sake of demonstration. The whole material is just a demonstration of, in their words, "the near-hopelessness of attempting to teach". I think it's important to look at the interactions of both sides of polarity within the material to actual come to an understanding of the underlying message of unity. That is why I conjecture of it both ways.

Truth be told, I think it's 'unpolarized' and that is why it causes such an uproar. The reason I think you have to look at the concepts of polarity is actually to do the work of the mental exercises of the disciplines of the personality. To work towards unified thought you harmonize opposites and these must be realized in the self. A mirror can also aid in this task, such as the Ra Material.

So am I projecting my distortions on to the material? Of course, but I can do that because they already exist in the material. Am I not all things? The material is just a tool for looking at myself, but the self that I am is the same as all others, so it is important to me how EVERYONE interacts, not just what's happening for me. I am maybe a bit selfish in that I do focus quite a lot on others but this is only because at one point I had a deep realization that the swiftest way to face my own distortions is by seeing others with the same distortions and thereby gain an observational awareness of my own behaviours reflected back to me. I think we all actually have ALL distortions, it's just a matter of which ones are energized. So by exploring all sorts of concepts and 'releasing the energy' you can de-energize your distortions in order to balance out the system. It's like EQ'ing music. Sometimes you need some dissonance to get the right tone for the song. Other times you need to maintain harmony.

People tell me to look at myself, and I say, I am. Everything outside of me reflects myself, right? It's all a process and the problem with these kinds of forums and communications is that you get a snapshot of someone's mind in mid consideration but then if it changes you have no way of knowing unless that person makes another post. So the whole sense of 'process' is very much lost over this medium. No one can see what is going on inside of me through my words and words are not adequate to explain to, so I can only offer confusion.

In the end, I am simply empty Infinity. Here and now, I'm just a guy trying to make sense of his impressions of the world along with the rest of the humans.

I'll also admit that sometimes I reflect certain distortions which are not my actual beliefs for the sake of bringing those distortions to light. This, again, can come across in communication as though that is my belief system, but in truth the contents of my beliefs is rather small, but the contents of my questioning is massive.

[GentleWanderer]

______

[Aion]

...
I do agree that it causes a energization of all of one's distortions. However, the question for me has never been 'good or bad' but rather, what is the dynamic that is taking place? Rather than viewing the material as a 'thing in itself', I view it as a collage of relationships and interactions, each which serves to potentially illustrate or illuminate some part of the Creation in that you SHOULD be able to find both positive and negative philosophy in it if it is truly relating to Unity. That might strike some people as strange, but I think that's actually fundamental to the whole concept of Free Will as espoused by the Law of Confusion. They need to make both philosophies available.
...

Truth be told, I think it's 'unpolarized' and that is why it causes such an uproar. The reason I think you have to look at the concepts of polarity is actually to do the work of the mental exercises of the disciplines of the personality. To work towards unified thought you harmonize opposites and these must be realized in the self. A mirror can also aid in this task, such as the Ra Material.

Ra offering some basics metaphysical principle without encouraging neither the positive nor the negative path ? Kind of "these are the rules, now do what you want".

Yes, exactly which is supposed to be the primary point of Ra's respect for Free Will is that they don't 'promote' either path. This is why Ra freely offered the information on the negative as well, because they always have to offer the choice of personal assessment, at least how I see it. The fact is, is Ra claim themselves to be 'unpolarized' and while they did say their SMC developed along the lines of STO (although they had a few negative harvest as well) that means that in their currently unpolarized state they are BOTH. Ra is also self-serving and of service to others. It would not be be a message rooted in unpolarized unity if that wasn't the case.

Remember that Ra was trying to get something out of the contact as well. They wanted to attempt to alleviate the distortions they created in the past and despite them having no attachment to time this is clearly still a strong desire within their collective self, strong enough that they 'have not left [our] vibration'. During channeling Ra says that they accomodate Carla's distortions AS WELL as their own, which means that their desires also play a role in all communications.

So I guess I maybe have a more 'human' view of Ra than some. Also why I find it kind of interesting that people talk about it as 'pure' and 'positive', when if it's pure in terms of unity then it's not pure in terms of positive and vice versa. The positive at the point of unity embraces the negative, doesn't deny it.

We spoke to one who heard and understood and was in a position to decree the Law of One. However, the priests and peoples of that era quickly distorted our message, robbing it of the, shall we say, compassion with which unity is informed by its very nature. Since it contains all, it cannot abhor any.

This suggests to me that Ra is compassionate towards the negative rather than viewing it as an 'opposition'.

[Ankh]

85.4 Questioner: What is the nature of this crisis?

Ra: I am Ra. The nature of this crisis is the determination of the relative polarity of your companion and yourselves. You are in the position of being in the third-density illusion and consequently having the conscious collective magical ability of the neophyte, whereas your companion is most adept. However, the faculties of will and faith and the calling to the light have been used by this group to the exclusion of any significant depolarization from the service-to-others path.

If your companion can possibly depolarize this group it must do so and that quickly, for in this unsuccessful attempt at exploring the wisdom of separation it is encountering some depolarization. This shall continue. Therefore, the efforts of your companion are pronounced at this space/time and time/space nexus.

85.5 Questioner: I am totally aware of the lack of necessity or even rational need for naming of entities or things. I was wondering if this particular entity had a name just so that we could increase our efficiency of communicating with respect to him. Does he have a name?

Ra: I am Ra. Yes.

85.6 Questioner: Would it be magically bad for us to know that name, or would it make no difference?

Ra: I am Ra. It would make a difference.

85.7 Questioner: What would the difference be?

Ra: I am Ra. If one wishes to have power over an entity it is an aid to know that entity’s name. If one wishes no power over an entity but wishes to collect that entity into the very heart of one’s own being it is well to forget the naming. Both processes are magically viable. Each is polarized in a specific way. It is your choice.

Hint, hint. Ra knows full well what polarity they are striving for. I find it odd to consider that they suggest the mere fact of knowing the entity's name would be 'polarized a specific way'. I presume because naming is an act of separation? It is true that generally Ra doesn't use names but rather functions like 'instrument', 'questioner', etc,

Anyways, these times where Ra offers a choice, but it's really obvious what the group's intention was I find peculiar.

And in another post you stated:

"There is also the fact of their implying that the most positive route is to simply love the entity at all times, and thus refrained from sharing its identity, even when Don asked they made a statement which implied that if they knew its name that that in itself would tempt them to the negative path".

Let me to walk you through these Q/As from my point of view:

"85.5 Questioner: I am totally aware of the lack of necessity or even rational need for naming of entities or things. I was wondering if this particular entity had a name just so that we could increase our efficiency of communicating with respect to him. Does he have a name?

Ra: I am Ra. Yes"

My understanding of the above is that since the group is striving for the positive polarity, they wish to be of service to their negatively polarized friend, but don't really know how. So Don comes up with the idea that maybe this entity has a name and if that might help them in their striving of being of service, and asks Ra if it does. Yes, it does, answers Ra. Through the whole contact Ra have been honest at all times, in my experience. And when they didn't know the answer, they said that they didn't know. Or when they guessed, they said that it was just a theory. Or when it was a violation of free will, they said that they couldn't answer because of that. Moving on.

"85.6 Questioner: Would it be magically bad for us to know that name, or would it make no difference?

Ra: I am Ra. It would make a difference."

Most of the people, myself included, would after understanding that this entity has a name, ask for that name. This is a normal progression of any conversation. "Does this dude has a name?" "Yes." "What's his name?" In that case the curiosity would have killed this cat. But nope. Not Don. This is where he gets highest scoring from me at least. Instead of jumping into the natural second question of knowing that name, Don asks *if it would make any difference, magically, for them to know that name*. So what should Ra answer? Lie? Don asks. Ra answers. Moving on.

"85.7 Questioner: What would the difference be?

Ra: I am Ra. If one wishes to have power over an entity it is an aid to know that entity’s name. If one wishes no power over an entity but wishes to collect that entity into the very heart of one’s own being it is well to forget the naming. Both processes are magically viable. Each is polarized in a specific way. It is your choice."

Again, Don takes highest points for his questions. He asks about what difference it would make to know the name of their fifth density friend of negative polarity. Ra explains. Again, what should Ra answer to these specific questions than the truth?

As you can see here, Ra didn't refrain from sharing that name. *Don refrained from asking it*.

I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that there are times in your other posts where you paraphrase statements from the Ra material which are not correct. I am not talking about your opinions and understandings, because these can not be correct or incorrect, but what you say Ra stated. I believe that before writing about what Ra said or didn't say, perhaps it is better to look that statement up first before writing about it?

[Aion]

Were I quoting and not paraphrasing, then I would do that. If you wish to correct my paraphrases with quotes you are welcome to. I believe the purpose of a paraphrase is to put in to your own words the gist of an idea that another expressed. It is your opinion they are 'not correct'. If I am intending to quote Ra directly, I do that. I see nothing wrong with your assessment, it is a valid assessment of the conversation. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. I would agree that Don refrained for asking for the name directly, even though I still feel Ra discouraged it. I'm sure that is a point we could argue on, but I really have no wish or energy to do so. Perhaps you see just explanations, but I see intent. Ra was invested in the contact for a reason and I don't think it was as casual as they made it out to be.

The fact is I disagree with Ra on some points, and so anybody who sees him as an 'end all' authority on metaphysic dynamics and matters is likely going to butt heads with me simply on principle. That is not my intention, just an unfortunate consequence of difference in opinion. I really mean no hostility.

If it comes down to my thoughts or the words of Ra, you can have the words of Ra, I have no need to spread my thoughts.

Oh but of course, Ra is Sixth Density and of such a higher state than myself, surely I must take their word as gospel. Sorry, don't mean to poke fun. I just find the whole matter somewhat amusing. The problem is you have to believe and trust Ra in the first place to put them up on that pedestal. I admit I do believe much of what they said, but I also admit I'm not sure I trust it. That is, of course, my own 'distortion' to work out, but it is what it is.

[Ankh]

Were I quoting and not paraphrasing, then I would do that. If you wish to correct my paraphrases with quotes you are welcome to. I believe the purpose of a paraphrase is to put in to your own words the gist of an idea that another expressed. It is your opinion they are 'not correct'. If I am intending to quote Ra directly, I do that. I see nothing wrong with your assessment, it is a valid assessment of the conversation. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. I would agree that Don refrained for asking for the name directly, even though I still feel Ra discouraged it. I'm sure that is a point we could argue on, but I really have no wish or energy to do so. Perhaps you see just explanations, but I see intent. Ra was invested in the contact for a reason and I don't think it was as casual as they made it out to be.

The fact is I disagree with Ra on some points, and so anybody who sees him as an 'end all' authority on metaphysic dynamics and matters is likely going to butt heads with me simply on principle. That is not my intention, just an unfortunate consequence of difference in opinion. I really mean no hostility.

If it comes down to my thoughts or the words of Ra, you can have the words of Ra, I have no need to spread my thoughts.

Oh but of course, Ra is Sixth Density and of such a higher state than myself, surely I must take their word as gospel. Sorry, don't mean to poke fun. I just find the whole matter somewhat amusing. The problem is you have to believe and trust Ra in the first place to put them up on that pedestal. I admit I do believe much of what they said, but I also admit I'm not sure I trust it. That is, of course, my own 'distortion' to work out, but it is what it is.

I just wanted to clarify my last paragraph in my previous post. I am not talking about assessment, opinions, understandings or interpretations of the Ra material. You see what you want to see. What I am talking about is when you say that they stated something which they clearly did not. In some cases they even stated the opposite. So when you say that they stated this or that, it would be great if you could firstly check for yourself if they really said that or not. That's all.

[Aion]

Redacted.

[Jade]

A thing that makes me think is the tragic story of the group and Don Elkins.

Of all the things that indicate any hint of negativity, it is the price Don Elkins paid -- I think it comes as quite a shock to first-time readers, I know it did to me -- and the part about displacing MBS complexes in negative time/space.  I really wonder why the stuff about the 5th density negative visitor was not transient, why those of Ra volunteered this information, since there's nothing specific to be done about it, and it only can cause fear.

The way I see it, is that Don bore a high burden of responsibility by asking the questions. The more transient the questions, the more detrimental it was for Carla to channel.

12.33 Questioner: Thank you. Is there anything that we can do to make the instrument more comfortable?

Ra: I am Ra. We ask you to realign the object upon which the symbols sit. It is not a significant distortion for one session only, but you will find upon measuring the entire assemblage that the resting place is one point four degrees [1.4°] from the correct alignment, the resting place an additional one-half degree [0.5°] away from proper orientation. Do not concern yourselves overly with this in the space/time nexus present, but do not allow these distortions to remain over a long period or the contact will be gradually impaired.

My other speculation is that it wasn't just that Ra didn't want to answer questions of the negative polarity, but that it was nigh impossible to channel this information through this specific instrument, who at the peak of the contact was stated to be at over 90% service to others.

They obviously mishandled the instrument in many ways. Ra later admits that their agreement to having two sessions a day was not wise and did not take into consideration the fragility of the instrument. Also, Ra tells Don early on that focusing TOO much on the state of the instrument can be equally detrimental to her - yet Don goes on to ask the first and last question of every single session to be about the weaknesses of the instrument. This is where all the filler talk of the negative entity comes in.

I think if the group had been able to learn how to assess Carla's energy without the aid of Ra, that they would have been able to go much further.

Of course, this binary perception of intentions might just be coded into our social memory complex.

This is in common with each of your orthodox religious systems which have all become somewhat mixed in orientation, yet offer a pure path to the One Creator which is seen by the pure seeker.

[Steppingfeet]

Of all the things that indicate any hint of negativity, it is the price Don Elkins paid -- I think it comes as quite a shock to first-time readers, I know it did to me -- and the part about displacing MBS complexes in negative time/space.  I really wonder why the stuff about the 5th density negative visitor was not transient, why those of Ra volunteered this information, since there's nothing specific to be done about it, and it only can cause fear.

About the displacement specifically, that information came about because of the question about what had happened to Carla when she was channeling Latwii (68.4). And thank God the group did gain that information because it lead to Carla's hand being held from then until her final channeling in 2011, and informed her of the necessity to guard against attempting to channel Ra without the group and the protocols. Thus precluding what I feel would have been a horrific fate.

Regarding the information about the 5D negative visitor in general, I would speculate that such information had the added value of letting the group know that the stakes were higher, the tuning more finely tuned, the consequences greater, the pathway a tightrope, and so forth. Carla's life in certain occasions was in physical danger (e.g. from suffocation, stepping into traffic, coma, etc.). This was due to the nature of the work, and the type of skilled malevolence that their light attracted.

They obviously mishandled the instrument in many ways. Ra later admits that their agreement to having two sessions a day was not wise and did not take into consideration the fragility of the instrument. Also, Ra tells Don early on that focusing TOO much on the state of the instrument can be equally detrimental to her - yet Don goes on to ask the first and last question of every single session to be about the weaknesses of the instrument. This is where all the filler talk of the negative entity comes in.

I think if the group had been able to learn how to assess Carla's energy without the aid of Ra, that they would have been able to go much further.

Of course, this binary perception of intentions might just be coded into our social memory complex.

This is in common with each of your orthodox religious systems which have all become somewhat mixed in orientation, yet offer a pure path to the One Creator which is seen by the pure seeker.

That's a novel idea I hadn't before considered: had the group been able to see the energetic dynamics and not needed to seek Ra's evaluation, they might have been able to go further - at least in terms of preservation and support of the instrument. Such advanced ability would probably have a number of benefits, including making them less vulnerable overall and better able to ward against negative intrusion. As Ra indicated, had Carla the necessary magical training, she would be able to protect herself from the negative time/space displacement. (68.11) They relied instead upon love and harmony itself for protection, along with of course the specific white magical rituals and other protocols.

It is interesting that there could be over-focus on the instrument's state. At the same time, I can't imagine watching a physically fragile loved one go into that precarious state and not book-end each session with questions about the instrument. In fact, I could do it no other way were I in Don's shoes, or where I a questioner in that scenario.

[rva_jeremy]

It seems like my previous post is being read as indicating disapproval of Ra for sharing certain information.  However, in the context of the conversation I was engaged in, I was simply explaining how these pieces of information helped me to understand how somebody could see this material in a negative light.  Obviously, none of that is sufficient to give me that opinion!  

To be clear: I don't think any of it is negative, but I do think it's sometimes scary.  Casual readers who are unwilling to reckon w/ the severity of the Creation, as I said earlier, could easily take these episodes in the Ra contact as indicative of a far darker orientation that I think is warranted.  

If we're honest with ourselves, I think we'll admit that we all often make sweeping judgments in our survey of a diverse body of information.  There's a lot to choose from in the realm of metaphysical information, and I'm sure we all have pet peeves and turn offs that disqualify potentially insightful stuff.  For example, just because L/L Research's criteria for reliable channeling are not always followed by other channels does not mean they cannot bring through valuable information.  I'm sure some find the Confederation's message downright boring and trivial, and that doesn't make them shallow and us the serious ones.  It just means infinity is actually composed of infinite aspects, which is why we need it all.

My point is to encourage us to cultivate an understanding attitude towards those who reject the material for any reason, to try to put ourselves in their shoes and understand the objections.  We'll be better advocates for the Confederation's underlying philosophy if we balance that severity within.  We can't expect every single reader to be careful or sympathetic readers of our favorite body of work, but empathizing with them will help make sure we can nevertheless show them the love and respect that all deserve.

[YinYang]

My friend who's sharing my apartment with me is reading the Ra material at the moment. She saw it on my bookshelf and said "what are these?" and I said "one of my great discoveries". It has been interesting to listen to her comments as she progresses through the material, she's always carrying one of the books with her. One day I walked through the door and she said "can we just talk about this infinite rockness business..." Lol! We had a good laugh about that.

Sometimes she sits on the balcony reading, and just burst out laughing. I always walk out to find out what's so funny. Yesterday she said "Ra's quite funny!", I said "I know they are, but which bit are you laughing at?" This bit "It may further be noted that water is a type of crystal which is efficacious also although not as easy to hang from a chain in your density."

She's at the part now where Don discovered for the first time that Carla is under psychic attack from the 5th density entity, so she has a lot of questions. Why is he attacking her? Is it serious? etc. I told her that Don dies in the end, and she just stared at me. She's constantly Googling things she reads about in the material, like the Tunguska event or the crystal skulls, which is all new to her. I forget sometimes all the directions the material sent me in when I read it for the first time.

[GentleWanderer]

______

[Ankh]

My friend who's sharing my apartment with me is reading the Ra material at the moment. She saw it on my bookshelf and said "what are these?" and I said "one of my great discoveries". It has been interesting to listen to her comments as she progresses through the material, she's always carrying one of the books with her. One day I walked through the door and she said "can we just talk about this infinite rockness business..." Lol! We had a good laugh about that.

Sometimes she sits on the balcony reading, and just burst out laughing. I always walk out to find out what's so funny. Yesterday she said "Ra's quite funny!", I said "I know they are, but which bit are you laughing at?" This bit "It may further be noted that water is a type of crystal which is efficacious also although not as easy to hang from a chain in your density."

She's at the part now where Don discovered for the first time that Carla is under psychic attack from the 5th density entity, so she has a lot of questions. Why is he attacking her? Is it serious? etc. I told her that Don dies in the end, and she just stared at me. She's constantly Googling things she reads about in the material, like the Tunguska event or the crystal skulls, which is all new to her. I forget sometimes all the directions the material sent me in when I read it for the first time.

This is so amazing! Thank you for sharing! I wish I would have a friend IRL so to speak with whom I could laugh, share and talk about LOO like this.

But there was one time when I had a friend with whom I could also share about LOO. I remember especially one time we made this joke about our opposable thumbs. Our joke was about walking into a cosmic bar located somewhere in the rings of Saturn next to the Council, where those other 500 Confederation entities were too. And all of us were different. Since we were locals, we had our *opposable* thumbs! And we would brag about all those awesome stuff that we could do with our thumbs to other Confederation members! OMG, we laughed so much at that joke that tears were falling down my face!

[Ankh]

The answer is probably in the material, does Carla and the group are from the Ra smc on a soul level ? How many on B4 thinks they also originate from the Ra's smc ?

Ra never told them if they are due to Law of Free Will. They just said that two of them were of sixth density and the third one of fifth density, graduating into sixth. 

My theory is that two of them are of Ra, and the third one is of Latwii.

[Jade]

In my understanding, it appears to me in this session here that Ra says that Jim is of sixth density:

59.3 Questioner: I have a question from Jim that states: “I think I have penetrated the mystery of my lifelong anger at making mistakes. I think I have always been aware subconsciously of my abilities to master new learnings, but my desire to successfully complete my mission on Earth has been energized by the Orion group into irrational and destructive anger when I fail. Could you comment on this observation?”

Ra: I am Ra. We would suggest that as this entity is aware of its position as a Wanderer, it may also consider what pre-incarnative decisions it undertook to make regarding the personal or self-oriented portion of the choosing to be here at this particular time/space. This entity is aware, as stated, that it has great potential, but potential for what? This is the pre-incarnative question. The work of sixth density is to unify wisdom and compassion. This entity abounds in wisdom. The compassion it is desirous of balancing has, as its antithesis, lack of compassion. In the more conscious being this expresses or manifests itself as lack of compassion for self. We feel this is the sum of suggested concepts for thought which we may offer at this time without infringement.

Though I just want to add that I think this matters very little, I find it an interesting tidbit.

[loostudent]

Ra is of 6d. In their density "the polarities are harmonized". I don't think this means a mixing of positive and negative polarity (that would result in mixed orientation or confusion) but unity of compassion and wisdom - a compassionate wisdom or wise compassion.

[Ankh]

Ra is of 6d. In their density "the polarities are harmonized". I don't think this means a mixing of positive and negative polarity (that would result in mixed orientation or confusion) but unity of compassion and wisdom - a compassionate wisdom or wise compassion.

Right. It never made sense to me either that there was any mixing of polarities in mid 6D. Negative path is that which is not, as Ra called it, and needs to be abandoned before achieving Higher Self in mid 6D. Sixth density is the density of unity, so there is no separation there.

[rva_jeremy]

I always thought "the polarities are harmonized" means that, from the unified perspective, the real value of the negative path of "that which is not" is appreciated, on par with the Creator's appreciation of it. At unity, there is nothing really at stake: there is only experience and balancing. Having nothing at stake is only possible when there is nothing outside the self which which to compete or against which to defend.

The mystery of the service to self polarity is why that which is not would teach anything at all. How can falsehood convey information? How can infinity be somehow increased in experience? And yet, we are assured that somehow this is the best way we can reason about this.

[Sacred Fool]

The mystery of the service to self polarity is why that which is not would teach anything at all.  How can falsehood convey information?  How can infinity be somehow increased in experience?  And yet, we are assured that somehow this is the best way we can reason about this.

I guess I'm in a quibbling mood this morning.

So, are you implying that to love another is real and to love self is not real?  (I'll just assume "not.")  To love another is to assume duality which is also "not," no?  In other words, both loves are distortions of unity, just different flavors of such.  (Not sure how you can "learn from" a flavor, but that's another question.  Maybe, it's best simply experienced?)


Again, to posit infinity-versus-increased-infinity is to assume duality (which is, again, "not.").  So, just relax, man, try to slow down a little bit.  Don't think so hard.  Maybe non-duality will catch up with you when you're resting and stilled?

;-)>

[xise]

I always thought "the polarities are harmonized" means that, from the unified perspective, the real value of the negative path of "that which is not" is appreciated, on par with the Creator's appreciation of it.  At unity, there is nothing really at stake: there is only experience and balancing.  Having nothing at stake is only possible when there is nothing outside the self which which to compete or against which to defend.

The mystery of the service to self polarity is why that which is not would teach anything at all.  How can falsehood convey information?  How can infinity be somehow increased in experience?  And yet, we are assured that somehow this is the best way we can reason about this.

"How can infinity be somehow increased in experience" could also apply to the service to others polarity, or really to any sort of experience. Perhaps the Creator's exploration and search for experience is simultaneous and infinite, but for whatever reason - maybe the Creator has decided - that it can only be explored by individuated consciousness in mostly linear time. Maybe an analogy - so it's kind of like I may access to certain information - perhaps sensory input of a photo where I can't tell what's in the foreground - at my fingertips, but it takes processing to figure out what I'm seeing, and I think that's where we come in with experiencing reality. We're basically processing information for the Creator by individuated experience. 

Or something like that. I don't really know; it's all shrouded in mystery, after all.

[AnthroHeart]

I believe even the Creator begins and ends in mystery. Just like you said.

[unity100]

How can infinity be somehow increased in experience?

Infinity can never increase or decrease in experience. Infinity is irrelevant and inert.

What increases in experience and is relevant, is infinite intelligence. We call it infinite, for it is the closes state to infinity, but it is evident that it is not infinite in every aspect since we are able to put an adjective in front of it.

It is differentiated. It is intelligent.

Meaning it has a counterpart, that is non-intelligent. Ie doesnt have potential. Intelligent infinity would do whatever it is doing to approximate infinity by eventually merging/converging with its counterpart.

Just as we reaching infinity would take infinite time, Intelligent Infinity reaching infinity would take infinite time too.

Naturally, at the point of infinity, these have already happened.

[Infinite Unity]

Ra is of 6d. In their density "the polarities are harmonized". I don't think this means a mixing of positive and negative polarity (that would result in mixed orientation or confusion) but unity of compassion and wisdom - a compassionate wisdom or wise compassion.

At the end of the road, you find out that they were more You then you could ever imagine. That the creator is not light nor dark, but finds only a means to express through those capacities. You are the relentless predator, and the adapter to consequence the prey.

[rva_jeremy]

So, are you implying that to love another is real and to love self is not real?  (I'll just assume "not.")  To love another is to assume duality which is also "not," no?  In other words, both loves are distortions of unity, just different flavors of such.  (Not sure how you can "learn from" a flavor, but that's another question.  Maybe, it's best simply experienced?)

The philosophical point I'm exploring can be described as the teleology of spiritual evolution, the "why" of this illusion of separation. Infinity being infinite, nothing can exist that is not contained within that infinity. So the issue is what it is about experience of separation in some of the forms you describe -- both positive and negative -- that makes's the Creator's foray into separateness valuable or necessary in some way that wasn't already part of that infinity?

In many cases the Confederation have described the Creator's ultimate goal as "knowing itself" or learning about itself in some way. The mystery, to me, is how something that is already infinite could have more of anything, whether that be knowledge, understanding, appreciation, etc. A goal implies a lack to be filled, and infinity cannot lack anything by definition.

I think the reason I think about this question in particular is that it exposes a difference between A Course in Miracles and Confederation philosophy. ACIM tends to paint a lot of the illusion of separation as objectionable precisely because it is not part of "what is real", in other words "that which is not". It literally says that any sort of negativity is not real and that we must wake up from the dream in which we believe it's real. However, the Confederation paints a picture where the illusion of separation somehow teaches or augments the Creator through some sort of evolutionary sequence of distilled experiences.

I'm not losing any sleep over any of this, Peregrine.

[loostudent]

What increases in experience and is relevant, is infinite intelligence /.../

Maybe what increases is relationship. Creation and lessons are basically dialogic. That's why we need free will. Logos (Word) is calling for response.

[unity100]

The philosophical point I'm exploring can be described as the teleology of spiritual evolution, the "why" of this illusion of separation. Infinity being infinite, nothing can exist that is not contained within that infinity. So the issue is what it is about experience of separation in some of the forms you describe -- both positive and negative -- that makes's the Creator's foray into separateness valuable or necessary in some way that wasn't already part of that infinity?

Precisely.

Infinity doesnt do anything since it doesnt need to do anything, for it contains everything that can be inside it. Therefore, it doesnt need to separate.

What we call creator, aka intelligent infinity is the thing that separates from its counterpart and creates the existence along with its counterpart.

It experiences infinite possibilities on its journey back to infinity.

[Sacred Fool]

I'm not losing any sleep over any of this, Peregrine.

So, your losing sleep over this stuff is that which is not?  In that case it would be negative and, according to your characterization of ACIM, you should wake up to the fact that it's not real.  Or, taking the LOO approach, you can view it as something enhancing your overall experience, once you have balanced it with it's opposite.  Do I have that right?  Or should I try to be serious about this?

But seriously, when you asked your questions, did love tell you how to ask them with love, or was love snoozing in the back seat?  I mean, there's a huge world out there that isn't pinched into such tight head spaces, rather, it simply embraces and releases such struggles.  Of course, the choice is yours.

As to expanding infinity and all that jazz, I wonder if the difference isn't like reading about taste of pineapple versus actually biting into one to experience it?  Intelligent Infinity may have all the theoretical answers, but it is not having all the fun!  That's our job, you see.

Lastly, I think you've constructed something of a false comparison in this sense: ACIM is trying to help beings unfold their potential to love by releasing fear, whereas Ra is trying to give an overall blueprint of a many-layered affair.  One is looking through a hand lens, the other at the vast construction.  Therefore, the lessons implied seem contradictory, but they were not trying to answer the same question, exactly.

QED  (ha ha)

[rva_jeremy]

Lastly, I think you've constructed something of a false comparison in this sense: ACIM is trying to help beings unfold their potential to love by releasing fear, whereas Ra is trying to give an overall blueprint of a many-layered affair.  One is looking through a hand lens, the other at the vast construction.  Therefore, the lessons implied seem contradictory, but they were not trying to answer the same question, exactly.

That's a novel way of looking at it, thanks for sharing.