07-08-2010, 11:28 PM
Some thoughts:
I'm not exactly sure what Ra meant by "learning for" a student. The quotes you gave, GLB, are both to questions/answers about the tarot/archetypical mind, which was an area that Ra considered extremely powerful/dangerous. For example, "[w]hen the archetype is translated without regard for magical propriety into the manifested daily actions of an individual the greatest distortions may take place and great infringement upon the free will of others is possible."
Ra defined free will as "the Creator will know Itself," and their desire to avoid learning for Don seems to be congruent with their desire to avoid infringing on his free will in his exploration of the archetypical mind. He had penetrated the outer teachings and was exploring the form-building realms of the mind. At that level, thoughts are things. If Ra told him their thoughts, they would be taking his right to build his own thoughts, forms, and relationship to the archetypical mind. At that level, just because something works for Ra doesn't mean it works for Don. He is the Creator, he gets to know himself. Telling him how things are at that level would take away his right to create them himself.
To the question of the thread: the rules that apply for Ra in the area of the archetypical mind would also apply to a third-density adept. The master must not learn for the student in this area; it doesn't matter if the master is an incarnate third-density or a channeled sixth-density being.
This has been mentioned and hinted at in the thread already, but the fact that we're not aware of similar information having been brought through does not mean it hasn't been. The mystery schools reserve much for higher-level initiates who have committed not to reveal it except to other initiates.
Some (possibly) relevant quotes:
"Clues, we may offer. Explanation is infringement." (Think parables.)
"There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity."
"To take an entity before it is ready and offer it the scepter of magical power is to infringe in an unbalanced manner."
"There are, we consider, things which are not efficacious to tell you due to possible infringement upon your free will. Entities of the Confederation have done this in the past."
Finally, this quote may not be exactly relevant, but as I read it it seemed to me that it was describing the approaches of GLB and unity100:
18.6 Questioner: Basically I would say that to infringe upon the free will of 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: I am Ra. As one proceeds from the primal distortion of free will, one proceeds to the understanding of the focal points of intelligent energy which have created the intelligences or the ways of a particular mind/body/spirit complex in its environment, both what you would call natural and what you would call man-made. Thus, 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.
(This paragraph reminds me of unity100) 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.
(This paragraph reminds me of GLB)The area or arena called the societal complex is an arena in which there are no particular needs for care for it is the prerogative/honor/duty of those in the particular planetary sphere to act according to their free will for the attempted aid of the social complex.
Thus, you have two simple directives: awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in nature, awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in self to be shared when it seems appropriate by the entity with the social complex, and you have one infinitely subtle and various set of distortions of which you may be aware; that is, distortions with respect to self and other-selves not concerning free will but concerning harmonious relationships and service to others as other-selves would most benefit.
I'm not exactly sure what Ra meant by "learning for" a student. The quotes you gave, GLB, are both to questions/answers about the tarot/archetypical mind, which was an area that Ra considered extremely powerful/dangerous. For example, "[w]hen the archetype is translated without regard for magical propriety into the manifested daily actions of an individual the greatest distortions may take place and great infringement upon the free will of others is possible."
Ra defined free will as "the Creator will know Itself," and their desire to avoid learning for Don seems to be congruent with their desire to avoid infringing on his free will in his exploration of the archetypical mind. He had penetrated the outer teachings and was exploring the form-building realms of the mind. At that level, thoughts are things. If Ra told him their thoughts, they would be taking his right to build his own thoughts, forms, and relationship to the archetypical mind. At that level, just because something works for Ra doesn't mean it works for Don. He is the Creator, he gets to know himself. Telling him how things are at that level would take away his right to create them himself.
To the question of the thread: the rules that apply for Ra in the area of the archetypical mind would also apply to a third-density adept. The master must not learn for the student in this area; it doesn't matter if the master is an incarnate third-density or a channeled sixth-density being.
This has been mentioned and hinted at in the thread already, but the fact that we're not aware of similar information having been brought through does not mean it hasn't been. The mystery schools reserve much for higher-level initiates who have committed not to reveal it except to other initiates.
Some (possibly) relevant quotes:
"Clues, we may offer. Explanation is infringement." (Think parables.)
"There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity."
"To take an entity before it is ready and offer it the scepter of magical power is to infringe in an unbalanced manner."
"There are, we consider, things which are not efficacious to tell you due to possible infringement upon your free will. Entities of the Confederation have done this in the past."
Finally, this quote may not be exactly relevant, but as I read it it seemed to me that it was describing the approaches of GLB and unity100:
18.6 Questioner: Basically I would say that to infringe upon the free will of 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: I am Ra. As one proceeds from the primal distortion of free will, one proceeds to the understanding of the focal points of intelligent energy which have created the intelligences or the ways of a particular mind/body/spirit complex in its environment, both what you would call natural and what you would call man-made. Thus, 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.
(This paragraph reminds me of unity100) 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.
(This paragraph reminds me of GLB)The area or arena called the societal complex is an arena in which there are no particular needs for care for it is the prerogative/honor/duty of those in the particular planetary sphere to act according to their free will for the attempted aid of the social complex.
Thus, you have two simple directives: awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in nature, awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in self to be shared when it seems appropriate by the entity with the social complex, and you have one infinitely subtle and various set of distortions of which you may be aware; that is, distortions with respect to self and other-selves not concerning free will but concerning harmonious relationships and service to others as other-selves would most benefit.