Law of One Advanced Teachings and The Mind

[Steppingfeet]

Namaste wrote:If you're anything like me, that would have taken quite a while to construct. I will add openly and honestly that in my personal opinion, some of unity's writings contain language and structure that give hints to frustration/impatience/attachment. (Edit: this is an observation, not a form of judgment.) Some points I have made seem to be ignored then echoed back in another form. How we, as members, react to our own projections, are our own issues or non-issues :¬)

Hi Namaste, thank you, and indeed you are like me, or I am like you, because I fret over every word. When I am finished writing, I reread and fret some more. And when I am through with the second go-around, I do it again. This makes for a time and energy-consuming ordeal of writing. : )

In my humble opinion, I believe that Unity100 is not adept in the interpersonal communication department. As varied, wide, and probing as his conclusions, questions, and hypotheses may be, I think he has room for growth in relating his understanding to other living human beings who may possess understandings at variance with his own.

I believe and hope that we can all help Unity to grow in this particular line of development by lovingly reflecting back to him where it is that our buttons are being pushed, not with the intent to change him, per se, but with the aim of providing loving, blue-ray mirrors, communicating through our hearts how we feel hurt or mistreated or judged.

Unity100, being an ardent and sincere student of spiritual evolution, would hopefully take the initiative and use the prompting to engage in self-reflection and make an honest attempt to work in concert with those with whom disharmony has been engendered into order to reach resolution.

Unity, I believe, would much prefer to target the information being discussed rather than the people discussing it, but people - the souls participating in these forums - cannot be separated from the equation. As I was sharing with Peregrinus in a recent PM, we are here not so much to comprehend a body of information (however profound that information may be), but to realize the self reading the information. The material being discussed is simply a vehicle towards that end.

When there is disharmony present, we must first address those issues. One of Carla's cardinal rules of thumb is to place relationships before business. If there is disharmony within and among the members of L/L Research, or between her and anyone else, her first energy expenditure goes to reestablishing harmony -- even if that happens at the expense of the task at hand. (Though sometimes personal feelings need to be set aside to accomplish the task at hand, e.g., shoring up a flooding riverbank with sand bags, having your spotter lift the suddenly overly heavy barbell from your chest.)

That multiple people have had similar reactions to Unity100 suggests that there is something real and hopefully identifiable happening that cannot be ignored. All involved parties need to spend some time determining what the heck is actually happening, bringing it to the light of conscious attention so that it may be loved, accepted, and forgiven, and the window of opportunity closed for any would-be negative greeters seeking to disrupt the resilient and scintillating harmony of the Bring4th forums.

Unity100 wrote:the analysis was good.

No, not quite. You are incorrect. The analysis was freakin' awesome. Please review the analysis until you reach the same conclusion.



Just busting the spherical objects of reproductive capacity.

Unity100 wrotei will expend care not to use direct words like 'no'.

Thank you so much for seeking to be cooperative, Unity100, sincerely. The moderators sole function is to lovingly enforce the guidelines and to preserve and promote the integrity and harmony of the forums. We are committed to working through this issue and any other arises until the kinks are no more.

Unity100 wrotehowever i will try remaining unbiased, because i dont want to persuade anyone. the stuff i am attempting to discuss goes around the borderline of being infringement on other adepts' work. if i remember right, ra didnt relay much information regarding these, especially work of 7d, to refrain from infringing on the work of the adepts that were going to read the material.

I respect that you feel you possess a certain depth of understanding which, in consideration for others, you refrain from sharing. However, I'm not sure that any human being is in the position of the higher density social memory complex.

Ra knew that they were put into a position of authority. They also knew that they could in a heartbeat tell Don what the source of a particular imbalance was or what course of action he could take to alleviate it or who he was in past lives or who the second gunman on the grassy knoll was. From their evolutionary position, they have access to all of this information and they knew that the information, coupled with the authority ascribed their words, would be taken as truth and put into effect in the entity's life pattern, thereby circumventing the possibility of entity learning for itself through blind choice.

While a human (being the Creator) can know and become the One, dissolving all illusions, I still t believe that the human entity (however much the humanness has been transcended) has neither the overview that Ra possessed nor the capacity to infringe on free will the way Ra could.

As far as I understand it, if you are operating within the third density in a yellow-ray, chemical body, you are free to share your truth and serve to the extent it is requested without fear of infringing by doing the learning for the other self. Though I could be wrong.

If you have something to share which you feel is profound and relevant to the discussion at hand, please do so. If members of the forums or the moderators suspect that "infringing" is taking place, then we will kindly ask that the activity be discontinued.

Unity100 wrote:in another note, some subjects are too sensitive for people of certain groups. for example, imagine a thread discussing the orion influence in middle eastern religions. ra outright says that ten commandments were delivered by a negative orion group who have passed the quarantine.

Some subjects are, I agree, highly sensitive. But sensitive subjects can certainly be discussed with the appropriate care and tact applied to the discussion. (See the threads about sexuality.)

I think if the entity seeking to discuss highly sensitive material were to ask themselves, "How can I share this in a way which respects my audience? How can I word this so as to not trigger emotional reactions? How can I deliver this in a way which moves through the open heart?", it would not prove impossible to navigate through the tripwires of sensitive material.

That you raise this issue, though, shows that part of your thinking is indeed dedicated to considering the impact (negative or otherwise) your thoughts may have on others, and I thank you for this. In my humble opinion, more thinking in this direction will help balance the head-first plunges into extravagant intellectual discourse.

Unity100: not only that but they continued influencing the area for some time more, probably creating various event chains that found their way to various philosophies/religions from the area. even proposal of such things may be too much for certain individuals. and when seeing such a discussion, they may get aggravated and aggressive, nomatter how much love you pour into the subject. its conditioning. it is inevitable that these people will have to leave those attachments behind, and stop identifying with those if they want to move forward. most of us, i guess, have done it. i myself have done it and took a considerable time. however im glad i did it.

I agree, conditioning is par for the human course, it is something that no one escapes and only the enlightened, as far as I know, completely transcend and release. But, a word to the wise: it tends not to sit well with others when you tell them that their viewpoints are arising out of "conditioning". It really comes across condescendingly. Valid, monumental points can be neatly communicated without resorting to identifying someone else's disagreement with you as being the result of or influenced by "conditioning".

Unity100 wrote:but, there are probably countries even, in which possessing books like Ra, or other channeled material is possibly illegal. blasphemy punishable by law. back in 1980s, there could be no contact with people of those countries, and people of others. but now there is internet. these people can easily find places like this forum, meeting with material they cant even dare possessing and talking about in their countries openly. and these people may have reactions. on one side stands the appeasement of them, by stifling discussion of such sensitive subjects, on the other hand stands the free flow of energies and information.

You posit a legitimate and plausible scenario, however, this is not one we have yet encountered as far as I'm aware. No one of fundamentalist mindset has angrily shut down or subdued the course of discussion due to a dogmatic disposition.

It is a fine balance to strike between respecting the fullness and the truth of a discussion and respecting the sensitivities of the Bring4th members.

On the particular point of some (if not all) of the planet's holy works being corrupted by negative influence, I think that virtually everyone who participates in these forums has already accepted this basic premise.

Unity100 wrote: as for me, im not expecting anything from anyone. im not expecting love, or respect or attention or anything like these.

In that case, then, you won't be imbalanced by something less than love sent your way and you will hopefully be able to give love, in your own particular way, without the necessity of return.

The moderators, however, while being unable to make people give love to one another, are mandated to act in order to curb something other than the free giving of respect and love.

Unity100 wrote:someone who is not ready to think about or does not like what im saying thinking 'some random schmuck'...

I wouldn't say you're "some random schmuck".

You're not random at all!

Lots of love, from one schmuck to another.