Can the human infringe by doing the learning for another?

[Namaste]

It's actually a bit confusing. Ra says twice that they cannot "teach/learn" for the student.

94.14 http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=94&ss=1#14

90.29 http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=90&ss=1#29

They also say that if "if we learned for you, this would cause imbalance in the direction of the distortion of free will".

15.13 http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=15&ss=1#13

By "cannot", I believe Ra means, "will not". It is not that it is physically (or metaphysically) impossible to learn for another. It certainly can be done - it is called abridging free will and as such, Ra wisely refrains from doing so.

What I am trying to get at is this: Is the human being in the same position as Ra? Does this human need to withhold information for the same reason that Ra withheld information?

Thank you for clarifying your question. In short, I think not...

Ra has knowledge and wisdom regarding the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth densities. That's an incredible amount of wisdom that we can't possibly comprehend with our minds. This great wisdom yields a much greater responsibility, since we're so much farther behind in the evolutionary spiral. Ra's knowledge and power is far more capable of influencing our lower density civilisation (i.e. the misuse of power from the Egyptian High Priests).

You or I withholding some information with regard to the Law of One to another self is a different ball-game altogether. We are still under the heavy veil, and hence, cannot understand clearly. The veil is the key here, as we are not expected to understand fully, and hence the responsibility will be lower.

I would imagine for those who have connected to intelligent infinity and are enlightened, the responsibility is greater. Perhaps even, this answers your question as to why it has not been previously described/documented by these masters. Just a thought :¬)

Agreed. By "entirely different" though, I would qualify that by saying it would be different only in emphasis, not heart. The heart of Ra's message of unity would have remain unchanged, but a different questioner would have emphasized different facets of the "information which is ever and always the same"

Agreed. It was more of a case of comparing someone who was interested in particulars, such as manifestation or understanding dreams.

You're right, there is also The Daily Show and Calvin and Hobbes which are useful sources of information. : )

Without a disclaimer to the contrary, I'm left wondering if you are implying that I (GLB) am treating the Law of One material in this manner.

Haha!

Not at all, I was speaking openly to any reading this thread.

The reason I asked the question above about why nothing like the Law of One has appeared in the pages of history (to my knowledge, there is no system of thought prior to the flourishing of channeling in the latter half of the twentieth century that speaks of octaves of creation, STO vs STS, wanderers and so forth) was not precisely to say, "This is the ultimate and only source of valid information", but rather to contrast Ra's situation to the human's.

Perhaps the information that is given matches the balance - or imbalance of the left and right hemispheres of the brain (logic/rational thought or imagination/intuition). As we progress scientifically as a civilisation, and have rational minds to satisfy, Ra's technical descriptions are of great value.

When our/any civilisation is less technically/scientifically developed (think back to times with no electricity, cars, reactors etc.), that kind of technical information is interesting, but is it really that empowering/useful on a day-to-day basis. Probably not. The key is to understand the unity of consciousness and from this, one can act in a polarised manner, regardless of scientific background information.

Unity100 is contending that, there being no boundaries, the human can access any and all information if the appropriate conditions have been satisfied. I am contending that, while I essentially agree, the enlightened human at the same time does not enjoy the "overview" (for lack of a better term) that Ra does. *If* the human, of its own faculties of awareness, could see what Ra sees, why has nothing even remotely similar to the Law of One appeared in the past five or so thousand years of recorded history?

Agreed, I do not think that a third density brain is capable of understanding higher concepts to the same depth of Ra's. We may get glimpses, and packets of information, but it's still highly limited.

You raise a good point: the proclivity of enlightened teachers to speak through parable and metaphor so as to veil their message, making its true meaning available only to those with the eyes to see and ears to hear. Does this, then, point to the possibility of a human being able to infringe upon the free will of another by sharing information?

I think it does, under the criteria that this person had fourth density understanding while walking in third density. Jesus had lifted the veil. This, going back to the previous point, yields much greater responsibility.

I think the reason why spiritually enlightened teachers don't disseminate pure information, but instead speak in parables or tailor their message, is that one cannot move another into their open heart. One can guide another towards their open heart. One can point out to another that they are walking on a spiritual path, but one cannot actually walk the path for another. Communicating the Truth to another by way of metaphor or some other creative way must be the most effective way, or the Buddha and Jesus would have gone around speaking of the universal order of things.

When speaking to others who haven't yet begun, or are just beginning to seek, I believe it is more helpful to tailor the message to their particular mode of thinking at that time. Note that tailoring the message isn't changing the content, just the style of delivery. Rather than communicate as directly as you can with words the nature of Truth, speaking to them at their level will more clearly illuminate their own path of self discovery. This allows them to more clearly see how the Truth you're trying to express relates to them, and in effect, gives to them the first rung of the ladder that you yourself are already climbing. The "object of the game" is to allow the circumstances to come about that provide the first spark that ignites their fire of inner seeking.

For example, the message in the book "What is Love" was tailored towards the young person receiving it. But it still contains in essence what is communicated to the adults as well. (http://www.llresearch.org/library/what_i...e_pdf.aspx)

There is no blue chakra blockage when one doesn't communicate the full scope of information to others because in that particular area of the life experience, the full scope of information isn't requested by the ones who are listening. Therefore, by communicating to them the essence of Truth wrapped up in its own special way, like a gift you're giving to them, you're providing them with exactly what they need at that time. But just how, and when, to communicate, is always a puzzle to me...

Agree completely. One has to deliver information that is in resonance with the vibratory/emotional level of the other, otherwise it falls on deaf ears.