Share your vision for the harvest

[unity100]

This part of my discussion has nothing to do with the gradual vs. instant debate. This goes back to my assertion of ambiguity, or openness for interpretation, not by myself, but possible interpretation by another using unreasonable but undeniable logic.

What I'm arguing is simply the date, not the time span. And I'm not even arguing because I don't think 2011 would be an accurate date for harvest, what I'm upholding is the idea that the words could be interpreted by someone else to say that harvest could very possibly happen later in the future, not in 2011. Since 2011 was an approximation, it means that harvest will happen in the proximity of 2011.

this part i have already understood, and it is logical. but :

Meaning near 2011. But who judges what "near" is? It's a relative term.

this part was the problem. what decides 'near' is, us. we. the world society and its accumulated knowledge and info and generally accepted understanding of what a 'year' constitutes. ra knew what a year was for us. ra knew of probabilities. ra was more capable than us in calculating probabilities actually.

we know that harvest is apparently something that fits in a year. we were told it would happen IN some year, as you noted. this then leaves only the potentials for that year being in any given date.

and in that respect, if there was a likely year vicinity or probability that would allow harvest back and forth mobility with the date, they would express it. and in that, i am thinking that the most likely possibility, was that.

the world can destroy itself and no harvest may happen. the harvest may happen a year later. or it may have happened a year before in an alternate universe. yet, the chances of harvest happening 5 years later, is lost to me. since if there was such a possibility that could be noted, it would be told.

that.

If something has a 99% chance to happen a certain way, there's still a 1% chance it would happen another way, and so if nothing noticeable happens in the next few years, someone could still fall back on that 1% chance that it is going to happen a different way. That's all I'm saying.

yes. and you dont take risks on a 1% gamble in your own life. basically, you know that it will happen the other way.

I'm not saying it is not possible, only that it's possible that it won't be forced upon entities in incarnation at harvest time.

then harvesters will wait for 70 years so that the entities born a year ago may die normally ... is that it ?

What I'm saying is the possibility that contact doesn't even happen until the entity exits space/time.

then entities would have to die in order to make this contact.

Wouldn't this still require a single generation to be lost to another? The last generation incarnating into 3D and the first incarnating into 4D? It seems to make more sense to me that this transfer of body from 3D to 4D happens gradually with the evolution of the bodies.

that is a rather far fetched possibility (or it seems to) that we are speaking. but, if something like that happened, the entities born from these entities in 4d would be able to interact with these 3-4d entities. 3-4d entities would have of course less conscious interaction in the matter. and when they died, they would have just died. being less aware of their siblings in 4d, the problems would be much less. of course this is just speculation.

This is where the heart of my point in this discussion lies, and it might be something we'll have to simply disagree on. For the harvest taking place in 2011, I don't think it would be unacceptable to imply that Ra meant that the gateway to intelligent infinity opens in 2011. And again, I feel like Ra mentioning the entities not in incarnation being harvested at that time could be a clue instead of just a clarification. I feel like if Ra wanted to clarify that that's when all entities were harvested, they would have said "All entities will be harvested at this time." Instead, saying entities not in incarnation are included at this time could mean that, in the whole harvest, this is when entities not in incarnation are included. No doubt this would be a grand event, a major part of the harvest, and any entities not in incarnation at that time will no longer have a chance to incarnate to become harvestable after that date.

You may attribute my view to anything you wish, bias or bad logic or a misunderstanding of linguistics or what have you. I would very much like a quick and easy departure from this plane and this body which to me feels like a mask which is choking me...or simply just a quick and soon yet uncomfortable departure, as my curiosity drives me to wish to experience something different than this life, and I see that as a possibility, but not the only one.

well excuse me but i will have to just do that. you just reset everything back by totally ignoring the direct meaning of the direct questions and answers, and just loaded them with different meanings.

i can start with telling that if gates to intelligent infinity could remain open a whopass 100 years, ra would tell it, and move on to reiterate the same q/as you just totally resetted to nil, but it will be a loss of time.

if you would like to see that you can just go back a few pages and read it.

you are wanting to see 'possibilities' and just seeing them, regardless of what you read. it is a one way street. you dont need me to discuss anymore.

26.26 Questioner: I was thinking specifically if an entity was in Hiroshima or Nagasaki at that time and he was reaching harvestability at the end of our cycle, would this death by nuclear bomb create such trauma that he would not be harvestable at the end of the cycle?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. Once the healing has taken place the harvest may go forth unimpeded.

It seems to me that Ra is implying these entities must heal before they are included in harvest. They will not be healed by the time the gateway opens, as it is stated they haven't even begun to fully start the healing process. Yet they will be harvested anyways. Would this require the opportunity for harvest to last for longer than just a year?

harvesters are present at the time of harvest. they are the ones who allow entities to manifest their violet even if they are totally disarrayed.

moreover, as said before, harvest or harvesters cannot wait the uncertain healing duration needed by a number of entities. it is a mechanical opening to infinite intelligence in the case of regular harvests. not something that is on-demand.

'gateway to intelligent infinity opens regardless of the circumstances upon striking of the hour'. this also means, it would close regardless of the circumstances upon the striking of the hour. otherwise, there is no point to there being a hour, or a 500 planetary entity crowded confederation going berserk in order to increase harvest. 100 years in 3d, means a much longer time for the densities above, or time/space. endless work can be done in such a period. just look at spirituality of the planet and its state 100 years ago, and now.

Also, regarding the idea of a 4D population to fill 7 billion transitional bodies, what are we basing the average population of a planet on? I know we have an idea of how many planets are of a certain density, and what sort of percentages we can see from a mixed harvest, but do we have any idea about population? Couldn't it be possible that there are planets out there which support populations much larger than Earth? Conditions vary from Logos to Logos.

if you fall back to the initial post i made about that subject, you will see that i have taken entire galaxy as a calculation base (instead of just taking the 500 planet local confederation which would have similar tendencies) and i went on to lengths that include body type choices of logoi, the effect that would make on available technology and the effect that would make on the number of entities a planet could support.

please just fall back. its a long post and i can just not reiterate here. i actually am surprised why you are asking the very specific things i have a few times iterated.